April
April songs |
thank you for miracles on RD! - memories: two people on DYK, both connected to Oper Frankfurt, and don't miss yesterday's video of Pink Floyd given to me! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:58, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Main Page history/2022 April 13: the TFA is hard to overlook, but there are also peace prayers, a soprano and a theatre manager, - if you don't find them try here --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:47, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
dance and singing, peace doves and icecream --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
next offer: now you can listen to what I heard live yesterday, Kyiv Symphony Orchestra, Luigi Gaggero & Diana Tishchenko (violin) / Kulturpalast Dresden (25 April 2022 on YouTube (that's 25 April in Dresden, a different violinist, but the same program) - ours pictured here - dove sono as encore --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:12, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 25
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gravelly Hill Interchange, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Grand Prix.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Pink Floyd has an RFC
Pink Floyd has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. TSP (talk) 13:31, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
DYK for Hey, Hey, Rise Up!
On 6 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hey, Hey, Rise Up!, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that "Hey, Hey, Rise Up!" is the first new Pink Floyd song in more than 25 years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hey, Hey, Rise Up!. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hey, Hey, Rise Up!), 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. |
— Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for the article which is also featured on my talk today! - a song for you: Glauben können wie du, sung by the person I have on DYK today, right below the other. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:23, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- It's really Andy who did the main work on this, I just pushed it in the right direction. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:06, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Hook update | ||
Your hook reached 15,714 views (654.8 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of May 2022 – nice work! |
theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 09:30, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- team work is it - today performances in Ukraine - for Ukraine - for peace, at the bottom an imaginary set of eight DYK - and more May pics--Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- today more pics, and should this woman have an article? - or only her sons? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:41, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- today Melody (not by me), and more pics --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:04, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- a strong woman --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Happy Adminship Anniversary!
I also want to thank you for putting that pro-Ukraine message on your user page. Most admins are strictly neutral, so it's nice to see one condemning the war. 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 13:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
"You can't educate people with templates"
I'll bring this here to avoid sending that thread-from-hell even further off the rails, but I disagree with "You can't educate people with templates". Even though we all like to bitch about overenthusiastic templating, most of the templates actually work fine. The problem is that in general, we only see the instances where they haven't worked—there's no obvious way to track the number of people who e.g. get a {{uw-medrs}} template and think "Oh, I didn't realize medical articles have different sourcing requirements, I'll go look into that before I edit any further". ‑ Iridescent 14:07, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) "You can lead a horse to water, but it's no good trying to forcibly attach water wings" etc. And regarding WP:DTTR, the ones threatening a block are really the most inappropriate and counter-productive. There ought to be enough subtlety in the tool box to avoid unnecessrily just annoying people? I have no stats, of course. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:32, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- In my experience, a lot of the scary level 4 "you will be blocked" templates are a box-ticking exercise; we know perfectly well that the user is going to be blocked, they know perfectly well that they're going to be blocked, but it means they can't use the "I was never warned!" argument. FWIW, the user warning templates do actually work surprisingly often. The bored kids and junior employees goofing off in their lunch break tend to back off quickly as soon as they understand that their teachers/employers might see the warning on the IP talkpage and start asking questions. The templates that are tailored for specific situations such as {{Uw-joke4im}}, rather than just the generic "you are being unconstructive" waffle, can also work quite well. Realistically, we have 4000 active editors and 400 active admins; we don't have the resources to handwrite a tailored response to every "poop!" vandal. ‑ Iridescent 15:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, I guess. I can understand the need for consistency and the need to avoid appearing to give preferential treatment. But if an admin really doesn't seem to distinguish between an IP school-IP "poop!" vandal and a serious editor who's been around 15 years, perhaps they should think twice before leaving a template at all. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:10, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- To be honest I've never really understood DTTR. Surely 'the regulars' are the people who are aware that Wikipedia's templating setup is a mix of semiautomated processes and pro forma messaging and who know where to look if they do actually need to know more about specific policies, and thus are the people who wouldn't benefit from personalized messages? I might find it amusing when I get a message beginning "Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia", but for me to find it offensive would be like complaining that the self-service checkout at Morrison's didn't ask me how I planned to cook the food I'd bought. ‑ Iridescent 16:09, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- The cynic would probably say that there is a two-tier system of editors where some editors consider templated messages as beneath them. Practically speaking, sometimes you want a tailored conversation. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:16, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Lol. Design flaw: the self-service checkout at Morrison's does not have a "mute" button. The regulars are also people who are totally offended when they get a template slapped on their Talk page, in the middle of a "disagreement", when what would be much more useful would be a little hand-written message saying "I disagree with you about this because of x, y and z"... Martinevans123 (talk) 16:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Well yeah, it all depends on context. That said, nobody is seriously going to get upset at receiving a generic template for something routine like an article being AfD'd; nine times out of ten the template which provokes an angry "DTTR!" response is {{uw-npa4im}}, and when that gets wheeled out it's usually fairly self-evident why. If I really need to sit and manually type "User:Foo, please don't call User:Bar 'a worthless cuntbubble', it is uncivil" for them to understand it, then User:Foo is probably someone on whom it's not worth wasting the time it would take to type it. ‑ Iridescent 16:40, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- To be honest I've never really understood DTTR. Surely 'the regulars' are the people who are aware that Wikipedia's templating setup is a mix of semiautomated processes and pro forma messaging and who know where to look if they do actually need to know more about specific policies, and thus are the people who wouldn't benefit from personalized messages? I might find it amusing when I get a message beginning "Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia", but for me to find it offensive would be like complaining that the self-service checkout at Morrison's didn't ask me how I planned to cook the food I'd bought. ‑ Iridescent 16:09, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, I guess. I can understand the need for consistency and the need to avoid appearing to give preferential treatment. But if an admin really doesn't seem to distinguish between an IP school-IP "poop!" vandal and a serious editor who's been around 15 years, perhaps they should think twice before leaving a template at all. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:10, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- In my experience, a lot of the scary level 4 "you will be blocked" templates are a box-ticking exercise; we know perfectly well that the user is going to be blocked, they know perfectly well that they're going to be blocked, but it means they can't use the "I was never warned!" argument. FWIW, the user warning templates do actually work surprisingly often. The bored kids and junior employees goofing off in their lunch break tend to back off quickly as soon as they understand that their teachers/employers might see the warning on the IP talkpage and start asking questions. The templates that are tailored for specific situations such as {{Uw-joke4im}}, rather than just the generic "you are being unconstructive" waffle, can also work quite well. Realistically, we have 4000 active editors and 400 active admins; we don't have the resources to handwrite a tailored response to every "poop!" vandal. ‑ Iridescent 15:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
The specific problem I've seen is roughly as follows - I see a report on WP:AN3 (or even, heaven forbid, WP:AIV) - where a reasonably experienced editor and newbie / IP are arguing with each other. The newbie isn't communicating, possibly because they don't know how to, while the experienced editor is communicating in templates only. Here is a classic example of that escalating to ANI where I said "If you aren't prepared to take responsibility for what Twinkle and Huggle writes on user talk pages, do not use it.". I'd be interested in some evidence from a study that shows how effective templates are - I use the odd one for AfD notifications when I'm feeling lazy, but I do avoid them when the more preferable thing is to draft a hand-written message. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:36, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- There almost certainly is a WMF study into the effectiveness of templates, but it probably dates back to when they were deciding whether to invest in Flagged Revisions and as such is out of date. (It may not feel like it sometimes but both the vandalism rate and the rate of inappropriate new page creation have dropped hugely over the past decade, as we've progressively squeezed what IPs and newly-created accounts can do. Watching Special:RecentChanges or Special:NewPages circa 2008 was like standing in front of a firehose.) It would be easy enough to measure—just track each use of "if you continue you will be blocked" templates with whether the editor went on to be blocked, continued editing and wasn't blocked, or disappeared.) Anecdotally, the generic warning templates do work surprisingly well as a scarecrow; once people notice their edits are being watched they either slink away or they flare out and get themselves blocked, and either way the disruption stops.
- Where the issues arise is when people use templates on long-term contributors that were intended for brand new accounts. Even then I can see an argument for using the templates, even though it sometimes means people interpret it as "you think I'm so unimportant you're not even going to waste your time writing a personalized message". That we don't have the resources to write personal messages to everyone every time is just straightforward fact; anyone who's enough of a regular to be aware of WP:DTTR already knows this. ‑ Iridescent 04:47, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi Ritchie333, Iridescent, Martinevans123, and Jo-Jo Eumerus, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! Tryptofish (talk) 18:57, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people, as you did at this load of old buggery bollocks. Comment on content, not on fellow editors. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:00, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Are there new buggery bollocks? --Tryptofish (talk) 19:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but we're not telling you where! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:05, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, good! --Tryptofish (talk) 19:08, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Also: [2]. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:35, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but we're not telling you where! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:05, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Are there new buggery bollocks? --Tryptofish (talk) 19:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
One World (John Martyn album)
Hi Ritchie, would you be interested in taking that to GA, it looks like a GA at first glance as it is?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:10, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- It does look particularly good; however, I'm generally reluctant to take articles to GA unless I have done a significant amount of work and research myself, otherwise I might be stumped by questions asked by the reviewer. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:29, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's not easy to feel confident on something you haven't checked. The editor hasn't been on here since March. Perhaps I can convince him to nominate it and one of us can review it. A very nice day in the UK today wasn't it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:32, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oh yes, so it is. I've been stuck at work all day and haven't noticed :-/ Anyway, yes, if you can persuade the main contributor(s) to put it up for GA, that would be okay. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:42, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Long time no see, Doc Blowers. p.s. saw him on tour with that masterpiece Martinevans123 (talk) 16:44, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Very world dominating! Hope you're both well.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:13, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Solid mate, thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:23, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Very world dominating! Hope you're both well.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:13, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's not easy to feel confident on something you haven't checked. The editor hasn't been on here since March. Perhaps I can convince him to nominate it and one of us can review it. A very nice day in the UK today wasn't it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:32, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
I can't afford a PB and J sandwich, so here's a toast sandwich for you!
This is a nice guide! AmerikanKoloniser (talk) 03:48, 22 May 2022 (UTC) |
New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022
Hello Ritchie333,
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 721 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 1041 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)
June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive
Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive | |
| |
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. |