User talk:Jo-Jo Eumerus/Archive 28

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

→

Archive 35

Deletion of article on Stewart Levenson

Jo-Jo, I am contacting you to discuss the deletion of the article on Stewart Levenson. I am the editor who created the article, and I attempted to participate in the deletion discussion as it was happening, but the avalanche of delete !votes encouraged me to excuse myself. I am not surprised that the article, in the version that was first published, was deleted. Early on in the deletion discussion I had asked other editors to consider a previous version of the article that I had written and which I considered appropriately neutral. That request was ignored by many of the discussants (pretty clear from their comments). A few who did read that earlier version were, I think, so tainted by reading the version that was deleted that they felt compelled to !vote delete as a matter of principle.

The article was a paid edit, and I was very clear about my COI with regard to it. That aside, I continue to feel quite strongly that the earlier version of the article, the version I mention in the deletion discussion but which is now gone along with the other versions of the article, was not inappropriate for inclusion. I am willing to grant that Dr. Levenson might be a borderline case, but most borderline cases end up being kept rather than deleted. His name continues to appear in news stories, and the issue he has been involved with— the upending of the management of the Manchester VA hosital— continues to grow in significance.

Dr. Levenson is a friend of my father's. I met him a few months ago, and when he contacted me to inquire about the possibility of there being a Wikipedia article about him, I had originally offered to create one for free as a favor to him and to my father and because it seemed like he did qualify as notable given the recent news coverage he was receiving. I was then approached by one of the faculty at the Univ. of Arkansas to ask if I would create an article on him for a fee, and I told Dr. Levenson that I would have to give that article priority for the time being since I was being paid for it. Dr Levenson then also offered to pay me, and so despite being double booked, I accepted both requests. The article on the faculty person has not been considered for deletion, nor do I think it will be— it was written quite neutrally, and as a distinguished university professor he meets WP:ACADEMIC outright, despite the fact that I was paid for the article's creation (and with full disclosure along the way).

I realize that a deletion discussion that ends the way the one on Dr. Levenson did isn't going to be easy to dispute. The consensus of the discussion was very clearly against retaining it, and no one supported keeping it in any form except me. Even I only supported keeping it in the earlier version I mentioned in the deletion discussion. As you are the admin who closed that discussion, I understand that contacting you is the first step I must take to attempt to do this. I am not interested in having the deleted version of the article restored, I am interested in having the earlier version restored, the unpublished version I mentioned in the deletion discussion.

On what basis? On the basis that, my COI and paid role here aside, I believe that Dr. Levenson is notable. I believe that an unbiased person (oh, the irony) reading my earlier version of the article with its inline citations and neutral tone would never have nominated it for deletion. I believe that my disclosure as a paid editor caused this article in any version to be deleted unfairly. I am not asking you to restore the deleted version, I am asking you to consider restoring the unpublished version from the article history, the neutral version. I believe that Dr. Levenson has received sufficient coverage in independent secondary reliable published sources to qualify as notable, and that the unpublished version of the article I wrote on him reflects this. Please let me know if you would consider restoring that version to his namespace. And I say this as a deletionist (which I pretty much am). Thanks! KDS4444 ^(talk) [Note: This user has admitted participating in paid editing— trust but verify.] 01:05, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

At the risk of stepping on toes, but this statement is far too long. Some people didn't consider the first version adequate, either, and what about the BLP1E issue? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:02, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for saying so much; I will try to be more succinct. BLP1E says we should avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met: 1.) if reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event (no debate on this for now), 2.) if that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual (the ongoing news coverage already makes this seem debatable to me), and 3.) If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented (except the event here is notable and the individual's role within it was/ is both substantial and well documented). Thoughts on that? KDS4444 ^(talk) [Note: This user has admitted participating in paid editing,— trust but verify.] 09:40, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Well, I don't know anything about the topic. Whether "but it is spam" trumps "but it is notable" is a question that has been subject to a number of debates lately; I am inclined to punt this matter to WP:DELREV to see if folks would be OK with allowing recreation. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:39, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Punt away! I wanted to make sure I was following protocol by contacting you directly first. Let me know how I can put it to WP:DELREV (or if you would rather do that for me). KDS4444 ^(talk) [Note: This user has admitted participating in paid editing,— trust but verify.] 18:37, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

WP:DELREVD is the procedure. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:24, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Deletion review for Stewart Levenson

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Stewart Levenson. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. KDS4444 ^(talk) 23:01, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Filip Johansen wikipedia

Hello!

I believe that some time ago some people in my class created a Wikipedia page about me that has now been removed.

I did in no way sanction this, and now the traces of it is ruining my personal brand as it obviously looks like I created that page.

I saw you were the one to delete it, so I wondered if you could help me with something.

Is there any way to get it removed for good?

FilipJohansen (talk) 14:00, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, FilipJohansen The MediaWiki software is designed to keep everything added to it forever, but the content can be hidden from regular readers. Deletion is one level of such hiding; there is another one called WP:OVERSIGHT but it is only applied when any of the points in meta:Oversight policy#Use are met. I believe that Wikimedia Foundation staff can remove material server-side but I don't know of either criteria or how to ask for its removal (and I expect them to be very strict about it). Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:29, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Okey, perfectly understandable.

Then the best I can hope for is that when I die someone creates a legit wiki page about me.

Thank you for the help!

FilipJohansen (talk) 14:32, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Visar Musliu deleted page

Hello, About 2 months ago I created a page for Visar Musliu (a footballer) but it got erased as he did not have an appearance for an senior national team (I appologise for that). However, he made his debut for Macedonia today in the qualifier against Israel: http://www.uefa.com/european-qualifiers/season=2018/matches/round=2000717/match=2017815/lineups/index.html And I would therefore like to ask if it is possible to bring back the deleted page? Msb73505 (talk)

Greetings, @Msb73505: Perhaps it may be merited to use new sources (which discuss this particular appearance) in a WP:AFC draft; the deleted article was fairly short. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:11, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Its fine if it needs to be extrended, but since he is now indeed eligible for a page cant his page be reverted? Just cuz hhis page was short it doesnt mean he mustnt have one, and as I said Ill make sure to add more information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msb73505 (talk • contribs)

To be honest, I am also reticent at restoring the page because I am not sure on how far WP:NFOOTBALL reaches. So I'd be inclined to punt this to WP:DELREV. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:07, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-36

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Tech News

• We are asking Tech News readers five questions to make the newsletter better. You can answer the questions here. We are grateful for every reply we get.

Recent changes

• The RevisionSlider user interface has changed. You can now select revisions by clicking on the bars. You can move the blue knob past the yellow one and the yellow one will move along, and the other way around. [1][2]

Problems

• Some users have problems loading very large watchlists. It is working better than earlier but the problem has not been solved. The developers are working on fixing it. Until it has been fixed you can turn on "Expand watchlist to show all changes, not just the most recent" in your preferences and see if it helps. [3]

Changes later this week

• New filters for edit review is a beta feature to improve recent changes pages. It will work on watchlists from 5 September. [4]
• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 5 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 6 September. It will be on all wikis from 7 September (calendar).

Meetings

• You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 5 September at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
• You can see a presentation about and discuss the new Technical Committee on 5 September at 17:30 (UTC). There will be a presentation on YouTube and a discussion in #wikimedia-office on Freenode. You can use the web chat. [5]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

22:15, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2017

• From the editors: What happened at Wikimania?

• News and notes: Basselpedia; WMF Board of Trustees appointments

• Featured content: Warfighters and their tools or trees and butterflies

• Traffic report: A fortnight of conflicts

• Special report: Biomedical content, and some thoughts on its future

• Recent research: Discussion summarization; Twitter bots tracking government edits; extracting trivia from Wikipedia

• In the media: Google's Ideological Echo Chamber; What makes someone successful?

• WikiProject report: WikiProject YouTube

• Technology report: Latest tech news

• Wikicup: 2017 WikiCup round 4 wrap-up

• Humour: Bots

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:44, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

deletion of "Lacey Sculls" wikipedia page

Hello Jo-Jo,

My name is Jen Sanders. First I have to admit that I don't have a ton of experience with wikipedia, so I apologize in advance for any errors in etiquette or formatting, from my end. That is not my intention. I simply lack experience on wikipedia. :-) I created a wikipedia page for the tv personality and musician "Lacey Sculls". The page had been in existence for more than a year, however recently it was deleted. The reason given for the deletion was that the page "reads like a press release". Without any disrespect intended, in my humble opinion, whether or not something "reads like a press release" seems subjective. That was not my intention for the page to read like a press release, and for more than a year, no one had issue with the page prior to this. However that said, I am more than happy to make changes to the page so that it reads less "like a press release", if that will get the page back up. Honestly, I was just following the format of other musicians' wikipedia pages, (or so I thought), which is why I figured that the way I wrote the page was acceptable. I also made an effort to put references to all of the information that I posted on the page. Lacey Sculls is a relevant person in the music and television industry. Furthermore, several other wikipedia pages (that were NOT written by me) make reference to Lacey Sculls, and were linked to her page. May I kindly ask for your consideration of putting the page for Lacey Sculls back up, and I am happy to re-word it or change things around so that it fits the criteria for what is expected on wikipedia? Again, I was just following the format of other musicians' wikipedia pages, and it was not my intention for it to come across as a "press release". This was an honest mistake, due to my lack of experience, but I am willing to make the necessary changes.

Thank you so much for your consideration. :-)

- JSSanders JSSanders (talk) 02:32, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, JSSanders. The problem with that page is that as people in this discussion noted, there are not enough reliable sources talking about Lacey Sculls. Without them, we cannot permit an article on this topic. See WP:N which alas is not very concise. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:40, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk)

Greetings to you as well, Jo-Jo Eumerus. Thank you so much for your quick response. I read through the links and information that you provided - thank you for providing that to me. I think I understand what you're saying now... Basically, I used too many descriptive adjectives, rather than just factual statements, on the Lacey Sculls page? Is that correct? If so, I can definitely fix that. I DID list all of the sources, in the form of online interviews, write-ups, and articles about Lacey Sculls. So I was a little confused when you stated that there were not enough reliable sources. However, that said, I am more than happy to make the changes necessary so that the Lacey Sculls wikipedia page meets the criteria that you are speaking of. Can you please allow me a chance to make those changes? I was only coming from a place of inexperience, in regards to wikipedia. But with the new knowledge that I now have, I am more than happy to remove the text that makes it sound like a "press release", and I will keep it straight facts. I will also add additional sources if necessary. I kindly ask for your consideration in giving me a chance to correct that Lacey Sculls page. I think that I understand now, what the problems were with how I had the page written before. I enjoy wikipedia and I would like to be a part of the community. I am relatively new here, and this is a learning curve for me. I just kindly ask that you allow me the room to grow, and to learn. I kindly ask for permission to be given the opportunity to correct the Lacey Sculls page so that it meets wikipedia's standards, and is still allowed to exist on wikipedia. I think I understand now how to do it correctly. I truly would appreciate the opportunity to get this right. Thank you so much for your time and assistance.

Sincerely, JSSanders JSSanders (talk) 00:36, 2 September 2017 (UTC) JSSanders (talk

@JSSanders: You could ask at WP:AFC. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:51, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk)

Thank you, Jo-Jo Eumerus. I clicked on the link that you provided to me - thank you - and it was a little overwhelming for me. Would you mind telling me what I do once I get to that link? What do I click on? Who do I ask about this?

And lastly, since you were the one who deleted the page, can't you just un-delete it, and allow me to re-write it to fit the wikipedia criteria? Sincerely, JSSanders JSSanders (talk) 01:51, 3 September 2017 (UTC) JSSanders (talk)

I've moved it to Draft:Lacey Sculls. Note that if you can't find other people who talk about the topic, it won't be allowed back. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:11, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk)

Thank you SO much!! Jo-Jo Eumerus. I truly, truly appreciate you taking the time to do that for me. I will work on correcting the page to add more references, and remove the part that comes across as a press release, and I will work to find other people to talk on the topic, over the period of the next two days. Again, I thank you very, very much for your time, suggestions, and assistance with this! Have a great day.

Sincerely, JSSanders JSSanders (talk) 09:16, 6 September 2017 (UTC) JSSanders (talk)

Open proxy editing

Jo-Jo, I've got a question about how to report an IP that might be a block-evading editor using a proxy server. Any advice on who to talk to and general thoughts on simply editing from an open proxy? Not sure I really want to play whack-a-mole and file an SPI because "vague sockmaster but likely a returning user" isn't going to fly. Montanabw^(talk) 18:12, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, Montanabw. I see WP:OP but it looks fairly inactive - imma see if Kuru can comment on it. Does it remind you of some specific editor? I personally haven't dealt with block evaders much on this site. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:55, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Lyle Best

Please tell me why my page was deleted by you. We paid a person who claimed to be a professional to create and submit the page. What was wrong with it. It was up for a few years. Thanks Lyle R Best 96.52.56.98 (talk) 07:40, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, Lyle R Best. People in this discussion deemed the topic not well covered enough by others to merit an article here. Not all topics can have a page here, no matter how well written it is. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:49, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clinical method question

Thanks for closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clinical method. Do you think anyone would object to my creating the redirect I suggested in the discussion? VQuakr (talk) 23:06, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

I don't see an issue. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:50, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Bryson Pitts

Hi, I was just wondering why you deleted my article for Bryson Pitts? He is an actor who has appeared in major films already and is set to star in major films next year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerdyclayton (talk • contribs) 14:57, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, Nerdyclayton It was deleted because people here didn't think there was enough coverage. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:03, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, so what can I do differently to make it so my page won't be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerdyclayton (talk • contribs) 15:08, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

You can't. No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Unless the topic becomes well covered enough that WP:GNG is met, or if the future films are notable then they could met WP:NACTOR #1. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Andy Levin Deletion

Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus,

I am new to the Wikipedia community, so I am trying to be sure I follow community guidelines, but please let me know if I've made mistakes -- I tried to reach as much as I could!

I was looking for information about Andy Levin yesterday and noticed that his page had been deleted. I wanted to follow up to inquire about getting the page "undeleted" subject to edits that will address the concerns identified in the discussion of removal. I am not the original author of the post, but I've read the forum on the reasons for deletion. Some of the points are easily addressed like additional citations and adding more details about Mr. Levin, such as his 2006 election loss. I can easily add citations from a variety of third-party sources, such as the New York Times...etc and add other facts about his life that would read much less like an advertisement.

The thing I don't understand is the determination of notability. In Michigan, Mr. Levin is certainly a notable figure. After reading the notability guidelines, it seems that Mr. Levin meets some of the criteria. For example his creation of the No Worker Left Behind program in Michigan, Union Summer with AFL-CIO, Detroit Jews for Justice, and the Lean & Green Michigan PACE program all seem like lasting and important contributions to his industry of work. He formerly ran the 4,000 person Department of Energy Labor and Economic Growth for the State of Michigan. He is also frequently covered in a variety of news outlets -- both when he was in the Granholm administration and now as his self-built company operates a public private partnership with 33 local governments across Michigan to finance energy projects. I read an article yesterday from MIRS (it's referenced on front page of this site: https://mirsnews.com/welcome.php) that he is exploring a run for governor of Michigan -- this seems to imply notability, even if it does not meet the exact guidelines for proving notability of political figures set out by wikipedia. As I understand the guidelines, they do not seem hard and fast and generally seem open to interpretation by the wikipedia community and its editors/admins. Can you help me understand how to best justify Mr. Levin's notability? He truly is a notable figure in Michigan politics as well as in national labor circles.

Additionally, when reviewing the discussion on the removal of the article, I noticed the use of google hits as an argument against Mr. Levin's notability. As I was reading through wikipedia guidelines, I found this language: "Avoid criteria based on search engine statistics (e.g. Google hits or Alexa ranking)." While I understand that there were further reasons cited for deleting the article, I wanted to be sure that this didn't play a key factor in its removal.

Any guidance you have would be much appreciated.

Thanks! Connollycory (talk) 00:59, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, @Connollycory: I see an issue that on Wikipedia "notability" has a specific meaning (described at length on WP:N) that it doesn't have in the real world. Do these sources specifically talk about him or is he being mentioned in passing? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:17, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, Jo-Jo Eumerus, thanks for the quick reply. Some of the sources offer him as the subject, while others are covering something he created and then quoting him on the subject. There are others that quote him on a relevant subject and there are others still that are authored by him in prominent publications. As I haven't done an exhaustive list or analysis of every article, it's hard for me to determine the proportion of each of these. Perhaps I could either draft new copy with citations/references throughout and share it with you to see if it's better? Or I could edit the old copy and add citations/references and make sure to come from a perspective that reads less like an advertisement? Connollycory (talk) 14:31, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps send it through the WP:AFC system? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:35, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-37

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• You can get a notification when a page you created is connected to a Wikidata item. You can choose to get these notifications in your preferences. Some wikis already had this option. It is now available on all wikis. [6]
• The Newsletter extension is now on mediawiki.org. The newsletter extension is for newsletters where you can subscribe by getting a notification when a new issue has been published. It will come to more wikis later. [7]
• The Linter extension helps you find technical errors in articles. There is now a new high-priority category: tidy-whitespace-bug. This usually affects templates with horizontal lists. You can read more about using Linter and the Tidy whitespace bug. [8]

Problems

• Tech News 2017/36 reported about new filters for edit review coming to watchlists. This was planned to happen last week. It will happen next week instead. [9]

Changes later this week

• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 12 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 13 September. It will be on all wikis from 14 September (calendar).
• OOjs UI will be updated. This could affect some icons. You can read more about the changes.

Meetings

• You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 13 September at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.
• You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 12 September at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

• You can't use OCG to create PDFs after 1 October. This is because of technical problems. You can use Electron instead. Most PDFs are already created with Electron. Electron will get missing features before 1 October. You can create books but they will not have all planned features until November or December. You can read more on mediawiki.org.
• New filters for edit review are available now on recent changes as a beta feature. Some of those filters and other features will be deployed as default features in the coming weeks. Users will be able to opt out in their preferences. [10]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

19:16, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of Holly Neher

Please userfy the article to User:Paulmcdonald\Holly Neher. Thanks!--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:11, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:18, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Page Deletion Mike Shaikh

I am writing to dispute the page deletion of Senator-in-waiting Mike Shaikh. Mike Shaikh was elected in 2012 under the The Senatorial Selection Act (115/2005) as well as the Senate Nominee Regulation (215/2004). His reading of the Legislation suggests that his term as a Senate Nominee does not expire until a new writ is issued for a Senatorial Election. That is the law. The next Alberta election is not until 2019.

There will be a vacancy in the Senate for Alberta in 2018 for which Mike Shaikh qualifies with elected advantage. ‎He is the only person who is elected as nominee waiting to be appointed.

As per the page reading as a resume, the concern which brought the deletion to our attention was that it is used for introduction purposes at events and some of the material was out of date. We believe it was derived from local media vs factual documentation. This was not Mike Shaikh's action nor intention.

I request that the page be relisted.

Sources available upon request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Conquesttraining (talk • contribs) 05:07, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, @Conquesttraining:. First off, who is "we"? Second, I think this article may be better recreated when Mr. Shaikh does actually take office. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:07, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to Admin confidence survey

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

FYI

I just moved a misplaced DRV nomination for an AFD you closed to the right place. T. Canens (talk) 04:19, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:25, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of Page Ramachandra Tallam

Hi,

I found that the page has been deleted even after the edit and addition of some references. Today I came here to add one more reference, as I am trying to gather as much as I can about him. So, if you could explain that what lead to the deletion of the page, that would be helpful. Also, if possible, could userfy the page so that once I have the sufficient resources available, I can have the page added again. Thanks```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anand.19an (talk • contribs) 16:26, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings Anand.19an Seems like people here considered the topic not sufficiently covered by reliable sources. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-38

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• You can now see contributions from an IP range at Special:Contributions. Before you could only see contributions from single IP addresses. Some older contributions from IP ranges could be missing at first because it will take some time to add them. [11][12]
• Flow has been re-scoped to become Structured Discussions and the development has restarted. Phabricator projects and repositories have been renamed. [13]

Changes later this week

• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 19 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 20 September. It will be on all wikis from 21 September (calendar).

Meetings

• You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 19 September at 18:30 (UTC). See how to join.
• You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 20 September at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

• We are replacing Tidy on Wikimedia wikis. Editors need to fix pages that could break. You can read the simplified instructions for editors. Some wikis have already switched. If your wiki would like to switch to the new format now, you can file a task.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:32, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

AFD help

Hi. Something happened when I went to nominate an article for deletion. Got a message that the nom didn't go through and asked me to nominate again, which I did, but it created 2 nominations: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlo Zayne and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlo Zayne (2nd nomination). The link from the article, however goes directly to the 2nd nom. Would have simply deleted the second nom, but wasn't sure that was kosher. Thanks for any help. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:29, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings and done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorry about that. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:11, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of page HomeAdvisor CEO Chris Terrill

Could you please advise as to why HomeAdvisor CEO Chris Terrill's Wikipedia page has been deleted? I'm hoping to get it restored, and update it with accurate, correctly cited information. Thanks! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chris_Terrill_(executive)&action=edit&redlink=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pippiphooray (talk • contribs)

Greetings. Folks at this discussion with only two people decided that the topic is not widely covered enough to have an article. It was only two folks, though, so I can undelete it as a WP:SOFTDELETE but I'd like to know if you made your account just for this. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:48, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi -- I am newly in charge of monitoring this page and a few others, so I did need to create an account for that.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pippiphooray (talk • contribs)

Monitor the page on whos' behalf? Sorry if I am sounding inquisitorial, but we do frown on conflicts of interest and undisclosed paid editing. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:55, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

I monitor the page on no ones behalf nor am I paid. I have looked at the deletion information and I would like to contest that the page read like a CV. I don't believe it needed to be deleted and would like the opportunity to edit it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pippiphooray (talk • contribs)

(talk page watcher) @Pippiphooray: So what do you mean by "newly in charge of monitoring this page"? That implies that someone has decided you are "in charge". Who? Why? And which "few other" pages? PamD 17:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

To clarify -- As a frequent user of Wikipedia but never a member, there are areas I feel I could contribute to in this community, and I want to start my identifying and bringing to attention pages that appear to have been unjustly deleted. This is one such page, on account of what seems to be personal commentary amongst a small sample size, rather than decisions based on a lack of citation or factual basis. This task has not been asked of me nor have I been put in charge by a third party. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pippiphooray (talk • contribs)

@Pippiphooray: Well, please remember that neither you nor anyone else is "in charge" of any page: anyone can edit any page as long as they do so in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. And please remember to sign your posts on talk pages: the simplest way is just to type ~~~~, which adds your name and the date and time of your comment. It just makes it a lot easier for everyone else to see who's saying what in a conversation. Thanks. There is a lot to learn about editing Wikipedia but it's an interesting journey! PamD 18:18, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

@PamD: Thank you Pam and I apologize for all the confusion and misleading language. Pippiphooray (talk) 18:59, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Please let me know if you are able to submit the Chris Terrill page as WP:SOFTDELETE, and if so, if there is a different forum I should begin a thread in. Pippiphooray (talk) 19:44, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Was just doing so as you typed this. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:45, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

In2Musica

Hi,

I have created an article about In2Musica record label and it has been deleted by you. It's an official record label and everything written in that article was with reliable sources so why did you delete it?— Preceding unsigned comment added by NAOFC (talk • contribs)

Greetings. It was deleted because people here thought that the sources are not substantial enough to justify an article. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 September 2017

• News and notes: Chapter updates; ACTRIAL

• In the media: Monkey settlement; Wikipedia used to give AI context clues

• Humour: Chickenz

• Recent research: Wikipedia articles vs. concepts; Wikipedia usage in Europe

• Technology report: Flow restarted; Wikidata connection notifications

• Gallery: Chicken mania

• Special report: Two steps forward, one step backward: The Sustainability Initiative

• Traffic report: Fights and frights

• Featured content: Flying high

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jared Andre Sawyer Jr.

I've been watching Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jared Andre Sawyer Jr., though I couldn't make up my mind, and I didn't !vote. I appreciate your close, but I have a query. You say "consensus can change", but it hasn't changed - there is no consensus. So, in light of the previous AfDs (and the fact that it was possibly eligible for speedy deletion), shouldn't "no consensus" default to "delete" in this case? StAnselm (talk) 20:53, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Well, the previous AfD closed as delete and this one is a no consensus so consensus did change from the previous discussion to this one. I do not generally factor in previous AfDs when closing new ones as they aren't the same and things can change in the meantime. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:59, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Hmm. It sounds like you're saying the new consensus is that there is no consensus, whereas I would say there is no consensus to overturn the previous consensus - i.e. to delete. StAnselm (talk) 22:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Indeed. A second AfD is not simply a re-review of a precious deletion, but another debate on the same question. If it was a deletion review, then yes a "no consensus to overturn the previous decision" can mean deletion. JoJo Eumerus mobile (talk) 05:55, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-39

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• Wikitext syntax highlighting is a beta feature on Wikimedia wikis with text written from left to right. This beta feature is based on CodeMirror. You can now search through the entire article with CTRL+F or cmd+F when you edit. Before it just searched through a part of the article. The developers are also fixing a couple of other bugs. [14][15]
• Administrators on wikis that use Structured Discussions as a beta feature or by default can now create and move Structured Discussions boards. Structured Discussions was previously called Flow. [16]

Changes later this week

• You now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device or IP address that have logged in to your account before you will be notified after five failed attempts. For security reasons you will soon get an email by default when someone tries to log in to your account and when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address. This can be turned off in your preferences. [17]
• Users with extremely old browsers (for example Netscape 2–4, released from 1995–1997) which do not support Unicode will no longer be able to edit. They should try to install a new browser. [18]
• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 26 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 27 September. It will be on all wikis from 28 September. (calendar).

Meetings

• You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 27 September at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

• The Wikimedia Foundation Readers department has proposed changing the mobile website. You can read more on mediawiki.org. This would be a big change.
• You can't use OCG to create PDFs after 1 October. This is because of technical problems. You can still create PDFs. Tech News 2017/37 said the function to create PDFs from books would still work. It is now clear it will not work for the next few months. The developers are working on fixing this. You can read more on mediawiki.org.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:00, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Holly Neher

Hello, thank you for the userfy for User:Paulmcdonald/Holly Neher. In the AFD, the final decision seemed to hinge on WP:ONEEVENT and I believe that has been overcome based on continued media coverage. Please review the work article and advise.--Paul McDonald (talk) 17:56, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

I do prefer not to judge articles, there is a difference between assessing the consensus in an AfD about an article and assessing an article against policies. Personally I'd be a little doubtful. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:08, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for input!--Paul McDonald (talk) 18:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

News and feature articles are continued to be written about the subject. Therefore I enter the "obligatory template" below for the deletion review. I have no reason to believe you closed improperly or in bad faith, I just believe the subject now has surpassed the issues cited.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:42, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Deletion review for Holly Neher

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Holly Neher. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Paul McDonald (talk) 15:42, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

delete page nomination of elnaz golrokh

hi there, please tell me know why you deleted this page?i know sombody have been changed this article and deleted some sources,so please send me deleted text that i can edit this article,thank you so much Melody.nabavi (talk) 11:30, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, @Melody.nabavi:, the page was deleted because people here decided that it wasn't suitable for Wikipedia. Send the text to what? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:20, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

because this was my first article so i have request from you that give me a opportunity to edit this article that to be suitable for wikipedia i have many creditable sources so please accept my request that i be able solve this problem it would be great if you can send me deleted article for major editing thank you so much Melody.nabavi (talk) 21:41, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Um, send it to what? I can't do telepathy. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:15, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

"deletion of Lacey Sculls wikipedia page - then moved to drafts

Hi there, Jo-Jo I first would like to say, I very much thank you for moving the Lacey Sculls wikipedia page from "deleted" to "drafts". I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to learn! I spent the last few days rewriting the wikipedia page of Lacey Sculls, taking in the feedback that I received, (stating that the way that I originally wrote the page read too much like a press release, and also that it didn't have enough references). So in re-writing it, I made huge efforts to remedy those issues. I went to several other wikipedia pages of artists, musicians, and television entertainers. I studied the way that those wikipedia pages were written, and I tried very hard to follow that writing style and format . I also added a TON of references to the newly re-written Lacey Sculls wikipedia page. Would you mind, please, checking that out for me please? It's currently in "drafts". I don't want to make the page "live" yet, without first getting approval. (Forgive me, I'm still in the learning stages of how this all works.) Secondly, prior to getting deleted, the wikipedia page for Lacey Sculls was being redirected from Lacey Conner. (She changed her last name midway through her career, when she got married, so she is known by both her maiden name - Conner - as well as her married name - Sculls). Could you please make that "redirect" from Lacey Conner to Lacey Sculls please (Lacey Conner is currently referenced on multiple wikipedia pages, but now it no longer links to any wikipedia page.) And lastly, some "vandals"/trolls have written spiteful comments on the Lacey Conner / Lacey Sculls wikipedia page in the past. Is there a "light" protection that can be added to her page? (but that will still allow me to make the occasional update to her page, when necessary?) I apologize for all of the requests and questions. Thank you so much for your patience with me though. You have been incredibly helpful! I want to thank you enormously for that. :-) Cheers, Jen Senders JSSanders (talk) 00:46, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

@JSSanders: I think you may want to send that draft through WP:AFC. If it's approved you can add the redirect. As for protection, if an issue arises you can ask on WP:RFPP; we do not protect pages pre-emptively. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:22, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Okay, I understand. I will do that. Thank you so much!

Sincerely, JSSanders JSSanders (talk) 00:42, 30 September 2017 (UTC) JSSanders (talk)

Picking your brain

Out of curiosity, do you have a feel if the volume at AfD has gone down since 14 September (ACTRIAL rollout)? I would go through the old logs, but they're pretty useless for counting quickly because of the relistings. Since you're so involved in closing, I thought you might have a feel. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:51, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

No, I didn't have such a feeling. Granted I close enough of them that they fall out of my memory fairly quickly. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:51, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Re: File:Samsung Pay Logo.svg

It appears as if this should be okay on commons as per the category with 100+ files with similar wordmarks. Jon Kolbert (talk) 13:53, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Well, I don't know whether these files are appropriate either. I see two deletion requests for two of the files in that category with minimal participation which were closed as keep. I don't know if this is enough to justify relicensing the enwiki file. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:29, 30 September 2017 (UTC)