User talk:Spicy/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022

New Page Review queue March 2022

Hello Spicy,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.

Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.

In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently 819 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 859 administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.

This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.

If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Question on user behavior

Hi, I noticed that you cleaned up some of the drafts by Nyaytyhyaynyiyeylyluytyeysy. Since you've looked at some of their edits, I thought I might ask. This user has had some history of creating unsourced articles, a number of which have bee draftified or deleted. I have warned them and have considered taking it to AN if it persists. Do you think this is appropriate as a WP:CIR case (considering they already ave quite a few notifications) or would it be a bit WP:BITEy? TornadoLGS (talk) 02:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

TornadoLGS, it's a bit sad as I think they are making an effort to write about encyclopedic topics but don't quite understand how to do it properly. They're editing from the mobile web interface, which means that they may not even be aware that users are leaving messages on their talk page - see WP:THEYCANTHEARYOU. If all else fails, I guess a block might get their attention. Spicy (talk) 03:28, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

That's a helpful link there. For a while I'd thought people who've made problematic edits and didn't respond to comments either didn't check their notifications or just ignored comments. Well, I'm sure some do, but that's another possibility you've introduced me to. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:41, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Just an update, I have brought the matter to ANI. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Tarunanand30

Hi Spicy. User Tarunanand30 appears to be a shared account, per their edits at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tarun Anand (2nd nomination), to a lesser extent in their responses to Slywriter on their talk page. They may be unaware of Wikipedia policy. I'm unsure of the procedure for such, and thought I'd bring it by you as an expert on similar areas. (Probably it goes to either WP:UAA or WP:SPI?) Russ Woodroofe (talk) 20:34, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Russ Woodroofe there's not much SPI can do here. Probably the best thing to do is to report them to UAA under WP:IMPERSONATE - hopefully the issues with COI, account sharing, etc. can then be worked out in an unblock request. Spicy (talk) 20:43, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

INTSF SPI

Hi Spicy, I understand your reasoning, as it is the reasoning that has so often been applied to SPI case results, but it seems an odd one in a case where the SPI which had to be raised precisely because of issues with that sort of reasoning in past cases. The SPI specifically deals with old socks were left unblocked, giving them a free pass for later disruption. To see it closed deliberately leaving one of the socks unblocked, as well as not dealing with the remaining three from the 2021 reports mentioned, is a dispiriting history repeating itself story. CMD (talk) 01:58, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Chipmunkdavis the accounts listed in the filing, besides Mawster21, were all indeffed. As for Mawster21 - this is an especially frustrating SPI to deal with because CU is rarely useful and many of the socks have too few edits to be confident about the behavioural evidence. The threshold of evidence that I (and probably most others at SPI) consider sufficient to endorse a block is somewhat higher than what is needed to convince myself that an account is probably a sock. The obvious reason for this is to prevent incorrect blocks on innocent users, but there is another reason: the block has to stand up to the scrutiny of the wider community, some of whom will not be familiar with this case. If I ask for an account to be blocked based on weak evidence (in this case one edit and an unhelpful CU result) they stand a decent chance at being unblocked if they appeal, which makes it harder to block them in the future than if they had never been blocked in the first place. Unfortunately, it's sometimes necessary to wait until further disruption occurs to reach that threshold of confidence. This isn't to say that this is an ideal state of affairs, but Wikipedia does not have effective tooling to deal with this sort of persistent abuse. Spicy (talk) 05:30, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate the recognition of the problem. I do think however, that for the 8/9 May 2021 reports, accounts that exist solely to revert me more than pass any remotely reasonable threshold of evidence. I remain perplexed they weren't blocked at the time. CMD (talk) 05:59, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Chipmunkdavis I've just realized that you were referring to unblocked accounts in the archives - by the remaining three from the 2021 reports I thought you meant the newly awakened sleepers that you reported in the current filing. I suppose you could file a new report. It's going to be a hard sell to convince people to block accounts that haven't edited in over a year, though, and realistically I'm not sure how much disruption it would prevent (they can just make a new account). Spicy (talk) 08:02, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

A new account takes 10 days to mature; these can be activated instantly. Given the other accounts in the report that as you note have been indeffed are identical cases (literally from the period and in the same reports), I'm afraid I don't see how this is a hard sell at all. Blocking just some of a set of identical sleepers but not blocking others is just weird, and as I noted in the SPI, is simply inviting further disruption. I'm not sure what the tangible gain is that this course of action is meant to achieve. CMD (talk) 09:22, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

SPI

First, thanks for running the CheckUser on this possible puppeteer. I had originally submitted DietCokeFeast (DCF) as the likely puppeteer, as this editor has had more edits than either MemaidenModus or the IP 108.30.74.80, and is active even today on the same topic of SPI concern. You changed the SPI to MemaidenModus (because that user is the oldest?) who has been inactive for 3 years, as I reported, and therefore "stale" - highlighted in your CU - a conclusion that seems to me to dismiss the SPI as not being relevant currently - perhaps this is why no other SPI admin has begun the investigation.

Just looking for your interpretation. I'm assuming a new SPI on DCF could be introduced to the queue, although I have never needed to do that because investigations were always handled promptly in my few previous experiences of submitting a SPI request. Thanks for your work to date and your reply here on your page. Zefr (talk) 18:00, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Zefr - to clarify, I'm not a checkuser, just a SPI clerk. The description of MemaidenModus as "stale" isn't a comment on the merits of the filing. It just means that a technical investigation will not be possible, because CU data is deleted a few months after an account's last edit; the case will still be evaluated based on behaviour. As for the case rename, it's standard to move SPI cases under the name of the oldest account for record-keeping purposes even if that account is not currently active. There's no need to file a new SPI as the concerns about DCF & the IP will still be addressed under this case.

Cases where Checkuser is not possible do tend to take longer to be dealt with since it takes time to analyze the behaviour. I haven't looked closely at this case beyond declining the CU request but I'll take another look when I have time. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 19:19, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Acute myeloid leukemia FAR

I have nominated Acute myeloid leukemia for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 04:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022

New Page Review queue June 2022

Hello Spicy,

Backlog status

At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000 at the end of May.

Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.

In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).

While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).

Backlog drive

A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.

TIP – New school articles

Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.

Misc

There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:

Very high unreviewed pages backlog: 11139 articles, as of 06:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC), according to DatBot

There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.

Reminders

• Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
• If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
• If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
• To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Notes

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!

New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 July, 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. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. 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.

(t · c) buidhe 20:26, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

apologies

My apologies I was interrupted with a loss of battery power, but I've input the info - Thanks FOX 52 ^talk! 03:20, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

SPI behavior check

Spicy - please check this request of IP 50.45.170.185, who admits on their talk page having a WP account previously. This user is highly argumentative and WP:TENDITIOUS at lavender oil (PP against this user, but continuing at talk), having been involved in numerous edit wars and dispute discussions, leading to an ongoing ANI. It seems likely the previous account was blocked. Thanks for your work. Zefr (talk) 16:46, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I can take a look when I have time. Unfortunately SPI is perpetually backlogged and we are all volunteers. Hopefully the ANI thread will get more eyes on the issue. Spicy (talk) 02:07, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Me again

Are you still not wanting to seek adminship? You can see how bad the CCI situation is, and there you are, doing a major share of the work. Think how much faster you could go, and how much more you could do with the tools! I should sabotage you and ping in Diannaa, Moneytrees, MER-C and Barkeep49 all together ... and get an arm-twisting party together :). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:22, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi Sandy, thanks but the more time I've spent editing here, the more convinced I am that I'm not qualified for adminship and have no real use for it. Regarding the CCI, most of the copying I've found so far is only a few sentences long and doesn't require revdel (granted I've mostly been sticking to the easy ones). I'm also not very active at CCI in general. Spicy (talk) 17:15, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Formatting

You advised me to be more careful with filing sock-puppet reports. I have filed another report (for once not against CanadianHistorian!). I think I have done things correctly, but if you have a moment to spare, could you please look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EditingBot00. Thank you for all your time and help, which is greatly appreciated here! Best wishes and I hope all is well with you! A.S. Brown (talk) 08:49, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022

New Page Review queue August 2022

Hello Spicy,

Backlog status

After the last newsletter (No.28, June 2022), the backlog declined another 1,000 to 13,000 in the last week of June. Then the July backlog drive began, during which 9,900 articles were reviewed and the backlog fell by 4,500 to just under 8,500 (these numbers illustrate how many new articles regularly flow into the queue). Thanks go to the coordinators Buidhe and Zippybonzo, as well as all the nearly 100 participants. Congratulations to Dr vulpes who led with 880 points. See this page for further details.

Unfortunately, most of the decline happened in the first half of the month, and the backlog has already risen to 9,600. Understandably, it seems many backlog drive participants are taking a break from reviewing and unfortunately, we are not even keeping up with the inflow let alone driving it lower. We need the other 600 reviewers to do more! Please try to do at least one a day.

Coordination

MB and Novem Linguae have taken on some of the coordination tasks. Please let them know if you are interested in helping out. MPGuy2824 will be handling recognition, and will be retroactively awarding the annual barnstars that have not been issued for a few years.

Open letter to the WMF

The Page Curation software needs urgent attention. There are dozens of bug fixes and enhancements that are stalled (listed at Suggested improvements). We have written a letter to be sent to the WMF and we encourage as many patrollers as possible to sign it here. We are also in negotiation with the Board of Trustees to press for assistance. Better software will make the active reviewers we have more productive.

TIP - Reviewing by subject

Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages by their most familiar subjects can do so from the regularly updated sorted topic list.

New reviewers

The NPP School is being underused. The learning curve for NPP is quite steep, but a detailed and easy-to-read tutorial exists, and the Curation Tool's many features are fully described and illustrated on the updated page here.

Reminders

• Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
• If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.
• If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
• To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:25, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

not the place

Regarding [1], ok it isn't the place, but where is the place? Thanks. Gah4 (talk) 06:30, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Gah4 - I'm not sure what the issue is specifically, but if you have concerns about that article, I suppose you could try posting on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Radio. It seems to be fairly active as far as Wikiprojects go. Spicy (talk) 06:39, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

It was supposed to be related to Maestro2016 edits, which seemed to be less useful than they should be. The specific one was History of radio, but I suspect he edited other articles, too. Gah4 (talk) 06:52, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Gah4 perhaps the best place would be Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Jagged_85, then. There was some discussion there after Maestro2016 was blocked. Spicy (talk) 14:35, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Help with dracunculiasis

Hi there old friend. I've been (very) slowly cleaning up another article on a WHO "neglected tropical disease", Dracunculiasis, with an eye toward an eventual FAC. Any chance you'd have the time and interest to give it a read over and let me know where you think I should focus further effort? Prose improvements are likely needed and are always welcome, but I'd particularly appreciate comments on its comprehensiveness and "well-researched"ness; as you read, is there any aspect of the topic you'd like to see more about? Less about? I've been surprised how sparse the literature on dracunculiasis is, but I suspect if you send me in a particular direction, I can find whatever we need.

More importantly, I hope this message finds you staying well. Best, Ajpolino (talk) 00:13, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Ajpolino, good to see you again. :) I just skimmed the article and made a few minor edits. It reads well to me, with the caveat that I haven't looked at most of the sources yet and don't know much about the topic. Some things that stand out - the article mentions the countries where it is currently endemic, but is there any information on where it was historically endemic? The eradication section mentions various African countries, but the history section suggests it was endemic to the Middle East and possibly Greece at some point. According to sources the worms can be removed surgically as opposed to wrapping them around a stick... this should probably be mentioned. Are there any differential diagnoses? Possibly not as worms crawling out of your skin is pretty obvious, but if there are, that would be worth mentioning. Finally, the name is a mouthful and I wonder if it would be useful to include an IPA pronunciation in the lead, if it is sourceable. I don't feel strongly about that though. I should be able to take a closer look and read through the sources over the next few days. Nice work overall. Spicy (talk) 01:05, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Piggy-backing on the differential diagnosis question, as I saw some dreadful Youtube of a much bigger worm coming out of someone's skin ... not small white, but larger greyish brown. What other "worms crawl out of your skin" diseases are there? (Reminding me that I wrote delusional parasitosis.) I'll work on my minor tweaks and write up some more questions tomorrow; one part has me confused, but too tired to type it now. I saw lots of missing wikilinks, but I can do those. And I get the impression the Carter Center is still involved in surveillance, because of the citations? Should that be mentioned somewhere? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:48, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I may be having a Monday moment, but I can't think of another worm that crawls out of the skin (botfly larvae maybe?). If you can still find that YouTube video, could you please email it to me (or just let me know the culprit)? Thanks already for the edits and suggestions! I'll get on those, feel free to pile on more as you find them! Ajpolino (talk) 13:53, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Another random thought... if this runs on the front page, there will be commotion about the image again. If you want to avoid a repeat of the Buruli ulcer drama, it might be a good idea to add a less graphic but still educational picture that could be used as the TFA image, e.g. File:Dracunculus_medinensis_larvae.jpg. Not sure where that would fit though. Spicy (talk) 17:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Right! (Off to try to find that Youtube, but I have no recollection of where or how I came across it ... ) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:22, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it was a botfly. Wikipedia won't let me post a youtube link, but go to youtube and search on World Biggest Botfly removal from finger (not World's, but world) ... don't these things count ? Some source says the guinea worm is the biggest, but that thing was nightcrawler size. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:29, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Woof, yes the internet is full of botfly larvae removal videos. They have a satisfying/horrifying "how did that fit in there?" element to them. Though I'll admit that one looked unusually long...

Back to dracunculiasis, I've got "do an exhaustive image search" on my to-do list still. I've had surprising difficulty with this so far. Here's my wishlist in case you stumble upon a usable image somewhere: a blister pre-emergence, a worm post-extraction, someone drinking water through the filter straw (or running their water through a filter, or applying temephos), a worm emerging from a dog. I reached out to The Carter Center about some photos but haven't heard back. Perhaps I'll try some gentle pestering to see if I can get their attention.

Once there's more photos, I've got no problem with the main page folks running a different photo. I'm sympathetic to the idea that those who navigate to dracunculiasis should expect a worm crawling out of a foot, while those who navigate to the main page may be reasonably shocked. Certainly the main photo has more educational value, but I'll defer to the main page regulars when/if the time comes to choose. Ajpolino (talk) 05:29, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

The people doing the loud screaming last time weren't "main page regulars"; I'd never heard of many of them before, and haven't since ... but still, we don't want to go through that again. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:21, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

I found a few useful images on Commons and added them to the article... there were a lot of pictures that just weren't categorized correctly. Re. "largest", I assume that refers to length? Botfly larvae are fat but they don't grow to 3 feet long. Spicy (talk) 14:01, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Fantastic! Thank you Spicy. Ajpolino (talk) 14:31, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

About an SPI

Thank you for leaving a warning for Z4590 gever. NotReallySoroka (talk) 07:13, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP message

Hi Spicy,

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)

hi

. *pickledicae🥒 21:08, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

It's perfect. Much like this edit. Spicy (talk) 21:11, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Request

I seen you are involved in the Tellcrowbrow sock accounts investigation they are back as I suspected but they made the grave mistake of using their various sock accounts on the same articles is there any way of accelerating the process ? its quite obvious its the same user editing food/ethnicity based articles and plastering a pro Indian pov to all the articles and I must say the sources they use are highly unreliable. Veland.Ak (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Two socks don't make a right. Spicy (talk) 22:13, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP Award for 2020

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		For over 100 article reviews during 2020. Thank you for patrolling new pages and helping us out with the backlog! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:21, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Here is a barnstar to show appreciation for the NPP reviews you did back in 2020. We realize this is late, but NPP fell behind in some coordination activities. We are just getting caught up. If you don't want to receive "old" barnstars, please just ignore this and reply (with a ping) to let us know not to send you any more. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:21, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/D47817

Thanks! Drmies (talk) 03:21, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome, Drmies... and thank you for running all those checks. But you should probably thank Tamzin instead - I just stole some regex from her. :) Spicy (talk) 03:42, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Right on. Tamzin--thanks! Drmies (talk) 03:47, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - August 2022

Issue 18—August 2022

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter

Back (for now) by popular demand, it's the WP:MED Newsletter! Pardon the 9-month hiatus. This month features a catch-up list of promoted GAs since the last newsletter, and some calls to action for those looking to add to their todo lists. I hope this finds you well. Enjoy.

Newly recognized content

Since last newsletter (Nov. 1, 2021) Osteogenesis imperfecta nom. Psiĥedelisto, reviewed by Vaticidalprophet Tietze syndrome nom. TheRibinator, reviewed by Sennalen Coughs and sneezes spread diseases nom. AFreshStart, reviewed by No Great Shaker William Heath Byford nom. Delqa, reviewed by Ajpolino Henri Coutard nom. DanCherek, reviewed by Amitchell125 Riboflavin nom. David notMD, reviewed by Mertbiol Vitamin A nom. David notMD, reviewed by Hughesdarren

Nominated for review

Thiamine nom. David notMD Sesame allergy nom. David notMD

WP:MED News

• Since last newsletter, frightfully few medicine articles have passed through our main content review processes, Good Article and Featured Article. While we can agree there's more to editing than chasing bronze stars and green blobs, it would be nice to see the catalog of "Good" and "Featured" medicine articles growing rather than just aging. If you're interested in taking on a project but would like some light guidance or a helping hand, feel free to post your plans at WT:MED and you may find others willing to join.
• An ongoing effort seeks to review/update our oldest featured articles. Major depressive disorder, Lung cancer, and Schizophrenia are next on the chopping block (so to speak). If you're interested in helping to update any, please post at WT:MED or at those articles' talk pages. If you're new to the FA process, I'd encourage you to enlist the help of someone(s) who has been through the process before, as they can help clarify expectations and save you time.
• Got a minute? Running low on inspiration/motivation and need a simple task? Check out the 247 medicine articles tagged as citing no sources!

News from around the site

• The Reading/Web team has rolled out a new skin called "Vector 2022" that will soon become the default. Opt-in in your Preferences to try it out. As with any visual update, it'll take some getting used to. If you hate it, don't panic; once it becomes default you'll still be able to opt-out in your Preferences.
• The folks who brought us the nifty "Reply" button have now rolled out a "Subscribe" button to be notified of comments in a particular thread. I believe it's turned on for everyone now. Try it on a busy talk page (e.g. WT:MED).
• Voting is open for the community nominees to the WMF Board of Trustees, until September 6th.

Newsletter ideas, comments, and criticisms welcome here.

You are receiving this because you added your name to the WikiProject Medicine mailing list. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Ajpolino (talk) 21:28, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Thanks for working this out! VickKiang (talk) 04:35, 11 September 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)

Add more reliable resources and removed some resources you think it not real. Professor990 (talk) 18:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Adminship

Re: User talk:Spicy/Archive 5#Me again. Are you sure you don't want the tools for SPI? You do a lot of good work there. If you wanted an altruistic reason, the community and your fellow admins would benefit if you could action cases like these yourself. :) Mkdw ^talk 18:17, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mkdw. I'm not really sure that SPI needs more admins - I recently explained my thoughts on this here. Even if that were the case, though, I think it would be premature for me to run on that basis. I'm not particularly experienced as a clerk and still have a lot to learn. Spicy (talk) 02:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter - October 2022

Issue 19—October 2022

WikiProject Medicine Newsletter

Hello all. A short newsletter reflecting a quiet month in recognized content. If there's other types of content you'd like to see in the newsletter feel free to post suggestions here. Otherwise, here's your update for the month:

Newly recognized content

Sesame allergy nom. David notMD, reviewed by Nolabob

Nominated for review

Thiamine nom. David notMD, under review by Mertbiol Blood donation in India nom. Blood donation in India, under review by Larry Hockett COVID-19 pandemic nom. Ozzie10aaaa Cold medicine nom. That Coptic Guy

WP:MED News

• No news, which may be good news. Happy editing.

Newsletter ideas, comments, and criticisms welcome here.

You are receiving this because you added your name to the WikiProject Medicine mailing list. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Ajpolino (talk) 03:32, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Please request

Hi Spicy sir , I have a little problem with the language. But i need a chance to report in SPI, i will try to rectify my mistakes sir. PravinGanechari (talk) 18:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

I think you should consider contributing to the Wikipedia project in your native language. Spicy (talk) 18:54, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes sir I will try to contribute there too. But I have to contribute more on English Wikipedia only. I have not made any mistake while contributing. Only I get mistake while reporting SPI. Give me a chance sir I will take the help of another user for the language. PravinGanechari (talk) 19:06, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Spicy sir , I request you sir give me a chance. I promise sir. I won't waste your time PravinGanechari (talk) 16:57, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

PravinGanechari: you were told to discuss this at WT:SPI/C. Please don't post on my talk page about this matter again. Spicy (talk) 17:34, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Okay, sir PravinGanechari (talk) 17:39, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jacobkennedy

As CU data expires over time, it is unlikely that any useful data would be available. I'm not sure what you mean. Can you explain?--Bbb23 (talk) 12:56, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I presume that this is because CU data is only stored for 3 months and the last reports were from 2019. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 13:40, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

If that's what Spicy meant (sorry to be talking about you in the 3rd person), why wouldn't they just say "stale". It seems more likely they meant CU log data, which doesn't "expire over time", although it may become less useful.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:56, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Bbb23: I phrased it that way because with recent updates to the CU tool, it's theoretically possible that some of the past accounts may not be stale, although it's very unlikely and IMO not worth checking on that basis. (CU log info would exist, but I wouldn't bet on getting anything useful out of 3+ year old data). It's probably simpler to just say "stale", but I think that's slightly misleading because I've noticed that some CUs do check cases that appear stale, although usually ones where the accounts have been inactive for a much shorter time than this. Also, I've run into people who don't understand what "stale" means in this context and think that I'm telling them that their SPI is bad or something. Spicy (talk) 17:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. What recent updates?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Bbb23: See [2] and [3] (apparently not as recent as I thought). Spicy (talk) 18:18, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Although I hadn't seen the Phabs, I was aware of the new capability.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:39, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Query

Hello, Spicy,

You seem to be involved with most SPI cases and I was trying to remember a sockpuppet group that was focused on Philippine radio stations. Does that ring a bell? I came across Anterocambiado90 who created a hoax article about a Philippine radio station and considered going to SPI but I don't remember who the sockmaster was. Thanks for any help you can provide. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Liz, looks like you weren't the only one who noticed that account. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Antero\ambi. Spicy (talk) 03:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

{{bangs head on table}} I just filed a SPI incident against this sockmaster Antero\ambi earlier in October! How did I forget so quickly? But as you mentioned, there are several sockmasters who focus on Philippine radio stations. Why? Who knows. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Mop?

Two years ago you told Barkeep49 that you might be interested in an RfA in a year or five. Any chance I could convince you that this is a good time? You really would be a shoe-in given your SPI clerking. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm not interested or qualified. Spicy (talk) 20:03, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree that you'd make a great admin but RfAs are not always a walk in the park...you have to feel ready for one. But if you do become interested, know that you'd have a lot of support. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:39, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	For working through the queue so we could get to see that kitten. Girth Summit (blether) 19:18, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Girth Summit, and thanks for your excellent work at SPI as well. Spicy (talk) 21:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Vamlos, DerekHistorian, WorldCreaterFighter...

Hi Spicy! I have seen that you have split out Vamlos from the WorldCreaterFighter case. I think this the best step in order to disentangle the two (or more?) sockmasters for future reports. But just to throw in my 2cts as someone very familiar with these actors (having witnessed their antics for three years now in many pages within my personal range of interest): I am sure that Vamlos can be linked to DerekHistorian, and most probably also to the original user @WorldCreaterFighter, based on their POV, diction, and especially in the geolocation visible in the URLs of citations added by them. (Since we're not supposed to talk openly in WP about geolocations and IP locations, you can contact me via email for details if you like.)

The other actor must have been mixed up at some time with the "original" WorldCreaterFighter due to similar edit ranges and battleground behavior, even though they have quite different POVs and "linguistic" fingerprints. The second actor has been much more prolific in creating accounts in the few years years, and thus has become in the meanwhile the "typical" model for behavioral evidence and checkuser data. Prototype accounts for the second actor are e.g. Satoshi Kondo, AsadalEditor or RobertoY20. In fact, the second actor has repeatedly mentioned on several occasions that they are not the "original" WorldCreaterFighter, and in spite of their fondness for drama and dirty tricks, I consider this narrative credible.

This is of course all in the past, but I think it's worth to still keep this in mind for future SPIs. If the link of Vamlos to DerekHistorian (and earlier accounts, including the original sockmaster) is established, we have more resources of unambiguous behavioral evidence for both actors. Austronesier (talk) 19:07, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi Austronesier. There's no rule against discussing IP or geolocation info, provided it was obtained from public on-wiki evidence. Checkusers can't disclose that data if it was obtained through the CU tool, but there's nothing stopping anyone from clicking the "WHOIS" button at the bottom of an IP's contribution page.

It's unfortunately common for long-running SPI cases to get mixed up somewhere along the way. My favourite example is that most of the filings at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Evlekis probably have nothing to do with the original Evlekis (see [4]). I think that the most important consideration is whether the existing setup allows ongoing abuse to be addressed. It's obviously a problem if a case conflates two currently active operators with different CU data, since that will lead to false negative results when accounts are compared against the wrong actor. Trying to sort out exactly which sock drawer stale, already-blocked accounts belong to is comparatively less important IMO (although as you note, this can be helpful for behavioural analysis in future cases).

I was disinclined to include DerekHistorian in the Vamlos case based on Bbb23's comment here - though I suppose what he meant by I think Hunan201p was correct in the first instance when he believed that DerekHistorian was a sock of WCF depends on which "WCF" he was talking about. Clerks deal with a lot of cases, and sadly don't have the time to become as closely acquainted with individual cases as some filers are, so things not infrequently get missed. I did mention in my closing statement that the relationships between some of the accounts in the archive and Vamlos are still up in the air, and I'd say it's fair game to include behavioural comparisons to DerekHistorian or other accounts blocked as WCF in future filings. But not being overly familiar with these sockmasters myself, and not having access to CU data that might help clarify these relationships, I'm disinclined to revisit the case split at this point. Spicy (talk)

Thanks for your explanations. I agree that the only objective is to prevent further abuse and disruption. I also have no intent to pursue sockology for its own sake, tempting as it may be :) The original sockmaster, like many socks such as DerekHistorian and Vamlos, consistently added Google Books links with the suffix *.co.uk, and I also have come across related IP edits geolocated in the UK. This is the Vamlos-case from now on. The other LTA geolocates to Austria based on their IPs before they began to use VPNs/Proxys from all over the world. I can easily link several blocked accounts to the Austrian IP based on behavioral evidence. This will remain in the WorldCreaterFighter-case. It's a good and practical solution. Thanks again! –Austronesier (talk) 21:44, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

DYK for F. William Sunderman

On 4 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article F. William Sunderman, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that physician and scientist F. William Sunderman continued working until shortly before his death at the age of 104? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/F. William Sunderman. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, F. William Sunderman), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 5,204 views (433.7 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of November 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:00, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Dante8

Hi, you commented on the Dante8 SPI [5]. Unfortunately this user is just back on a new IP [6] after being blocked on their other IP [7]. It's the same person because the IP traces to exactly the same place and its exactly the same editing interest and writing style. What can be done about this long-term abuse? I am quite concerned about Timeline of reproductive rights legislation and many of these other timeline articles as Dante8 has been editing these articles for years. I think some of these articles should be protected. Psychologist Guy (talk) 18:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Blocked. --Blablubbs (talk) 21:13, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Blablubbs, while you're here, there's also 2600:1002:B002:E868::/64 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)). Psychologist Guy, you could consider requesting semi-protection of the targeted pages at WP:RFPP. (I can't protect them myself as I'm not an admin). Spicy (talk) 23:21, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Good catch, also blocked. --Blablubbs (talk) 08:15, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Streamside Salamander

Hi,

I am trying to submit an assignment and my edits for the Streamside Salamander page. However, I received an error. The error was about using a proxy link. I believe I fixed all the links, however wikipedia will not allow me to submit due to an automated filter. If you could please help me that would be great. Yarlagaddas (talk) 03:55, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi Yarlagaddas. Can you try adding your edits one section at a time, instead of doing it all at once? I think that should resolve the issue. I'd implement the edit myself but I'd need to check the text for issues and it's quite long - plus I'm not sure your professor would understand. :) Spicy (talk) 04:04, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

SPI

Hi there. On the recent SPI I reported, I have a query if that's OK? [8] does this mean it's linked to that case? I realise you sometimes can't give away too much information on SPI cases, so I'm just asking if that edit means they are linked in some way? Sorry, I'm new to this side of things. AND thank you for moving my misplaced message. The clue was in the section title which I missed. Knitsey (talk) 17:59, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Knitsey, yes, it's the same case and it will be merged. Spicy (talk) 21:24, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

I would never have guessed from the edits. Thanks so much for replying. Knitsey (talk) 21:34, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Div col

Hi. Regarding your addition of another div col end template on TM (album), per MOS:ALBUM, we should not use div col to split less than 20 names. You said it "looks weird" the way it did before—I think it looks harder to tell who's in Brockhampton versus who the additional musicians are with the addition of the div col you added. It looks like the additional musicians continue on to the top of the next column with your version, so I have removed the additional div col per that and the album style advice I just linked. Thanks. Ss112 14:33, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi Ss112, I was just trying to fix whatever was going on here that resulted in the reference section and navbox being placed in a column. Your recent edits have resolved that, so that's fine. Spicy (talk) 15:13, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

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) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Question about Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2A04:CEC0:1044:BFB9:E53A:546D:6518:F2F2

Hi Spicy, three days ago I started this SPI and you said it belongs to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gsthae with tempo!. Should I move the contents of the report to Tempo’s casepage or leave it as is? Thanks! ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 00:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Merging cases should typically be left to clerks (I see that GeneralNotability has just done the merge). FWIW, I didn't request a merge initially because I was unsure if the report was worth actioning or merging, but didn't want to close it outright as I thought it should probably be looked at by an admin who can see deleted contribs for the underlying range. Spicy (talk) 01:47, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge sixth anniversary

		The Bronze Maple Leaf Award
		This maple leaf is awarded to Spicy for writing or expanding two history articles and two biographies during the sixth year of The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 23:49, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

More socks of Kkm010

Ok ... I'm pretty sure that both Storm598 and Mureungdowon are socks of Kkm010 (the former being a stale sock). Angelika789 was a recently banned sock of Kkm010, and I thought I got deja vu giving the same warning about spamming sidebars to both Angelika789 and Mureungdowon. If you check the edits between these four, there is significant overlap in article topics, specifically regarding communism and socialism, but specifically in India, Japan, and Korea. Yue🌙 05:29, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Yue, I don't think those accounts are socks of Kkm010. Kkm mainly focuses on Indian politics while the accounts you've mentioned are mostly focused on Korea, and Kkm has a consistent edit summary pattern that I'm not seeing with Mureungdowon/Storm598. It does seem plausible to me that Storm598 and Mureungdowon are the same person as each other, although I'm on mobile and haven't looked into it too closely. If that is the case I don't think it's obviously abusive socking, although retiring during an ANI thread and cleanstarting isn't the best look... whether or not there is any actionable violation of policy (assuming they are the same person) probably depends on whether or not the issues mentioned at ANI are still occuring. Spicy (talk) 06:27, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Spicy. Thank you for your work on ChatGPT. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 23:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

SunDawn, thanks but this probably should have been left for 0xDeadbeef instead - I just created the page as a redirect. Spicy (talk) 23:46, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Spicy. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:47, 6 December 2022 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

I will self request a block until Arbcom take action to avoid further misbehave even they are not for purpose. Lemonaka (talk) 01:47, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

I've responded. I don't think that's necessary. Spicy (talk) 02:04, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:20, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

'Tis the season

Happy Yuletide!

Merry Yuletide to you! (And a happy new year!)

Schazjmd (talk) 17:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

You read my mind :)

I was just about to ask you how/whether to update the status at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marlia555786, when you did. Thank you! —C.Fred (talk) 15:44, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks C.Fred. If you're interested, there are instructions for admins at SPI here. Merry Christmas, by the way - hope everything's going well. My plans were cancelled because everyone in the family has COVID, so I'm spending Christmas Day at SPI... Spicy (talk) 17:59, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

IP edits on article created by sockpuppet

Hello Spicy (I would have asked Mkdw about this, but their page says that they are on a Wikibreak). One of the articles created by blocked sockmaster Tishoteles has had a couple of unexplained reverts by IP accounts, including removal of a COI template.

How do I request for an admin to check whether the IP accounts are is connected to Tishoteles please? And do you think it is worth requesting page protection for the article, to prevent other accounts reverting the changes? Thank you, MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:38, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

MrsSnoozyTurtle: Checkusers will not connect IPs to named accounts, so if you suspect that IP socking is going on you will need to make the case using only behavioural evidence. Because this can be difficult, and because IPs often don't stay assigned to the same user for very long, IMO it is not worthwhile to report most cases of IP socking to SPI unless the IP/range in question is being used persistently and prolifically. I assume you're talking about this article. I don't think there's enough disruption to merit either an SPI or page protection at this point. Of course, I'm not an admin so my opinion on page protection is not particularly relevant. Spicy (talk) 08:52, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. Even if you are not an admin, I still value it :) So I won't make a Page Protection request.

Just for future reference, I thought there was a way to privately submit an SPI request (eg by email) when IP accounts are involved? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 10:30, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Well, there's Wikipedia:CheckUser#Contacting_a_checkuser, but I think most CUs would be very hesitant to act on IP reports even through those venues. Spicy (talk) 22:12, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Great. Thank you for all your help. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:44, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Dante8 block evasion

Hi, I noticed you left a comment about Dante8's IP on the SPI I filed [9]. Dante 8 is back on the IP 100.11.62.231 [10] If you check the block log [11] they were already blocked for evasion but have come back after it expired. As you can see the IP was blocked on November 15, but was obviously unblocked on December 15 and has resumed editing [12]. I find this block evasion problematic. They have been doing it for years but just return on a new IP every month or so. The outcome is that there is long-term abuse on articles like Timeline of LGBT history, 21st century and List of LGBT firsts by year which the user has been editing on dozens of IPs for years. Is it worth filing an SPI or can we just have this IP blocked. Above I have shown conclusive evidence it is block evasion so surely an admin can act faster on this. Psychologist Guy (talk) 18:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Looks like the IP has been blocked. Spicy (talk) 23:13, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

NPP Award for 2022

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		For over 100 article reviews during 2022. Thank you for patrolling new pages and helping us out with the backlog! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 04:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)