User talk:Meatsgains

New Page Reviewer Newsletter Hello Meatsgains, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages! Backlog update: The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day. Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today! Technology update: The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225 General project update: On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page. Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it. To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC) Slovakia national bandy team You can read my comment at Talk:Slovakia national bandy team. Bandy Hoppsan (talk) 22:38, 11 October 2017 (UTC) @Bandy Hoppsan: Thanks for the notification. I responded on the talk page. Meatsgains (talk) 01:30, 12 October 2017 (UTC) Speedy deletion declined: Sonny arguinzoni Hello Meatsgains. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Sonny arguinzoni, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims importance/significance of the subject. Thank you. SoWhy 07:00, 13 October 2017 (UTC) @SoWhy: Thanks for the heads up. Meatsgains (talk) 01:55, 18 October 2017 (UTC) JackEL article Hallo, why did you tagged my article aboud JackEL? What is the problem with it? Can you please give me some advice what to change. with kind regards Jakabl — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakabl (talk • contribs) 02:26, 18 October 2017 (UTC) See the article's talk page. I responded there. Meatsgains (talk) 02:30, 18 October 2017 (UTC) ok. Thanks for your criticism. the article is not finished now. I'm going to work on it the next days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakabl (talk • contribs) 02:36, 18 October 2017 (UTC) Kevin Wilshaw Isn't it a little bit odd that after you reviewed the article, it got speedied? Doesn't reviewing it pretty much mean that you made a judgment that it didn't meet any speedy deletion criteria? How then could someone else come along and overturn that judgment? It would be like if someone removed the speedy tag and then someone else added it back. I thought CSD was only for uncontroversial cases, yet if your judgment differed from someone else's, that means there was a controversy. Smooth alligator (talk) 19:02, 18 October 2017 (UTC) When tags are added to new pages through New Pages Feed, they are sometimes automatically marked as "reviewed". So, to answer your question, no I wasn't necessarily saying they article didn't meet speedy deletion criteria. Meatsgains (talk) 01:35, 19 October 2017 (UTC) A barnstar for you! The Special Barnstar A thanks for withdrawing the recent AfD nom for the 2017–18 Ahmad Shah Abdali 4-day Tournament. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 06:41, 19 October 2017 (UTC) @Lugnuts: Thanks, much appreciated! Meatsgains (talk) 16:31, 19 October 2017 (UTC) New Page Reviewer Newsletter Hello Meatsgains, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages! Backlog update: The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day. We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive. Technology update: Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel. General project update: The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look. To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC) I have unreviewed a page you curated Hi, I'm MRD2014. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, M.A.C.A., and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. —MRD2014 Talk • Edits • Help! 02:02, 24 October 2017 (UTC) @MRD2014: I actually tagged the page for speedy deletion for having no content and it was removed from the page's creator. Meatsgains (talk) 02:23, 24 October 2017 (UTC) Late reply, but since content was added, I unreviewed it since a re-review was needed. —MRD2014 Talk • Edits • Help! 12:45, 24 October 2017 (UTC) Your GA nomination of Illusory truth effect Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Illusory truth effect you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wugapodes -- Wugapodes (talk) 06:41, 29 October 2017 (UTC) Your GA nomination of Illusory truth effect The article Illusory truth effect you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Illusory truth effect for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wugapodes -- Wugapodes (talk) 08:21, 29 October 2017 (UTC) Wrong data inserted into citation templates Hi Meatsgains, thanks for fighting linkrot. However, I just ran into an edit [1] where so many things went wrong that it is provoking my comment. In the above mentioned edit you added: |title=Sony präsentiert E PZ 18–110mm F4 G OSS für Videografen - photoscala|first=About The Author Redaktion|last=photoscala|publisher= In this example, you erroneously added the publisher (photoscala) to the |title= parameter, but added an empty parameter |publisher= and also added the publisher to the |last= parameter, which is meant for the surname of the author (Vieten), not the publisher. As |first= parameter you added "About The Author Redaktion", which does not make sense at all. This entry should have had the author's forename "Martin". An alternative to specifying the actual name of the author Martin Vieten, it would also have been possible to use the |author= parameter for a string like "photoscala Redaktion". If the author is not mentioned in the article at all, but it is clear that it must have been a staff writer, we typically leave this HTML comment |author=<!-- Staff writer, no byline --> in order to keep future editors from searching for the author name again. On the cosmetical side, if an article is already using a consistent style for citations, we usually try to maintain this for new entries. In this case, all the older citations had their parameter names prefixed by a space before the pipe symbol (example: " |parameter=xyz"), which creates a more readable flow in narrow edit windows than omitting the space. Old parameter names |first= and |last= are fine in general, but the usage of the more modern |author-first= and |author-last= (with hyphen) is preferred in order to better distinguish them from |editor-first= and |editor-last= parameters. I haven't checked if this the only example where things went wrong, but please keep in mind that the {{cite}} templates create metadata and are also "harvested" by bots to fill external databases, so it is quite important that parameters don't contain incorrect data. So, please check the data you fill into citations and don't blindly rely on the tools, or the whole effort might be counter-productive... Actually, if you are not sure about some citation data, it is better to just skip the citation and leave it to another editor to fill the gap than inserting incorrect data. Another suggestion to fight linkrot: Still accessible links should be check for being archived in the Wayback machine (http://www.archive.org) and the archived links be added to our references as well. Hope it helps. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 12:26, 29 October 2017 (UTC) Thanks for the note. The reFill tool clearly botched the format of references. Meatsgains (talk) 01:07, 30 October 2017 (UTC) Please comment on Talk:Racism in South Korea The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Racism in South Korea. Legobot (talk) 04:34, 3 November 2017 (UTC) Contesting the deletion of the International Society for Stereology & Image Analysis This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because International Society for Stereology & Image Analysis is respectful, non-profit organization, established decades ago and should be introduced to Wikipedia readers. I do not have any conflict of interest. I am the member of the society, but not involved in the management in any way. Members are scientists from all over the world. I will be happy to further explain the issue or modify the article. --Mimag343 (talk) 00:14, 5 November 2017 (UTC) I don't doubt that it is a respected non-profit however, there are not enough reliable sources detailing it to establish notability. The page has since been moved to draft space for you to improve before uploading back to the main space. Meatsgains (talk) 17:21, 5 November 2017 (UTC) While I agree (and I thank you for the removal) that some content was not encyclopedic enough. Perhaps you missed that recently I added external reliable sources to establish notability (listed as references). Especially important is an independent scientific article on the history of the Society. --Mimag343 (talk) 19:11, 5 November 2017 (UTC) Deletion of Alison Hartson Hello Meatsgains Thank you for notifying me of your proposed deletion of Alison Hartson. I have removed your proposal, made some edits to the article, and wrote an explanation for why we should keep the article in the article's talk page, as you've kindly recommended. I hope we may continue our dialogue in that space. Best, User:Mattomynameo (talk) 01:56, 6 November 2017 (UTC)