User talk:Famousdog

nova

Nova is a good journal reputed in the academic fields. Many universities give credits and loans to their professor for publishing here. I dot know why some editors in WIKI has a biased image of it. Nova is listed in Clarivate Masterfull book, which means that this includes a higher quality.

Material

WP:OR-Famousdog, The material is original. — Prenote • (talk) 13:33, 3 September 2017 (UTC+1)

I formatted the page in better understandable language, now the problem seems to be that is really technically high or an argumentation copied from University material. In effect they are difficult arguments for common people. Regards. — Prenote • (talk) 08:37, 31 August 2017 (UTC+1)

Rfc notice

An Rfc is opened at Charles, Prince of Wales, concerning that article's lead. You may want to keep that article on your watchlist :) GoodDay (talk) 17:27, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Famousdog. I've seen you editing recently and you seem knowledgeable about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 08:50, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hello Famousdog. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 10:27, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Message to famousdog Hi Famous Dog. This is a reply message regarding the article "Non-Instrumental Movement Inhibition". My apologies, but I am afraid I do not know how to make a message (except with prize stars) so I am putting this prosaic message here. In your suggestions for improvements, you mention that the article above is not notable, so in the update to the article there is now a citation to a 2016 Scientific American article that specifically describes NIMI and its importance to technology. Please feel free to delete this message once read. Best, relleh22hctac Relleh22hctac (talk) 13:35, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

• Eduards Andersons, as the information shows, played at an Olympics competition so the "Notability" or "Refimprove" tags were Inapplicable; the amount of sourcing is usually all there is, especially for these pre-Internet subjects. SwisterTwister talk 17:13, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
• There's another example today but this one is on an academic subject; on Jude Cassidy, you added the template "Notability" and also commented to the author, Britney.cuevas, they needed to add independent sources. However, the relevant Notability, WP:PROF, actually has no mention of needing independent Notability. In terms of Notability, Notability has been established in that she's published several significant works (cited thousands of times, showing she's clearly an expert). If you have any questions, please feel welcome to ask. SwisterTwister talk 16:57, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Famousdog. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Famousdog, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
• Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

• If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

• A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

• ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
• The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
• 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) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)