User talk:JDDJS/Archive 6
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:JDDJS. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Block
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. JBW (talk) 16:50, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
JDDJS (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I find it completely ridiculous to call what I did edit warring, when all I did was restore the status quo on articles. I was never the only editor to revert Sphynxdragon. Each of his edits were undone by multiple editors, before and after me. Sphynxdragon was the only one being reverted. I truly cannot understand how you came to the conclusion that I needed to be blocked when again, multiple editors were reverting him. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 16:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You need to commit to not edit warring. Restoring the status quo is still edit warring. Sphynxdragon has received a longer block than you. I am declining this request. PhilKnight (talk) 17:27, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
@PhilKnight So what should I have done? Let the unstable version of the articles stand? You are completely ignoring the fact that multiple editors reverted Sphynxdragon before and after me. It wasn't just a back and forth war between the two of us. It was Sphynxdragon acting against the consensus of several editors. Another involved editor has agreed the block against me makes no sense. [1] JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 17:36, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
@User:JBW, also, I do want to point out that you did not block either of my alternative accounts that I disclosed on my user page. User:Usertest1253 (which I haven't used in years and am not even sure that I know the password for) and User:I am JDDJS (which I do use on occasion) are both still unblocked. I have no intention of evading my block, despite how unjust and wrong I feel it is, but I thought that you might want to know about them. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 17:19, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
JDDJS (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I read the guidelines, and they do not at all make it clear if I'm allowed to make a second request for unblock. I know that I've seen editors do so in the past, but also know that doesn't mean that it's allowed. So I apologize if this second request is against policy, however I truly do not feel that PhilKnight fully evaluated the situation before declining my first request. He did not all address my main argument as to why the block is unfair, which is the fact that multiple editors were undoing Sphynxdragon's edits. Multiple editors reverted his edits before and after me. Not only was I restoring the status quo, but there was a clear consensus that they were the preferred version of the pages as again, multiple editors other than me resorted those versions and Sphynxdragon was the only editor against them. Another editor even pointed out that my block didn't really make sense here. If this was just between the two of us, I would have stopped reverting him long ago. But it was extremely that it was not just between the two of us. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 18:16, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You seem to be trying to justify your edit warring, not tell us what was wrong with it. That others reverted as well does not mean that edit warring was acceptable. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 19:34, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
First, you are perfectly free to make a second unblock request. As for what you have said in your unblock requests, you are essentially saying that you think your repeatedly reverting doesn't count as edit-warring because you are convinced your edits were right. Wikipedia's policy on edit warring is, basically, "don't edit war", not "don't edit war unless you are convinced that you are right". Indeed, it would be completely meaningless to have an edit warring policy which exempted any editor who was convinced that he or she was right, as in most edit wars everybody involved thinks they are right. JBW (talk) 18:23, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- @JBW That's not even close to what I'm saying, and I don't even know how you came to that conclusion. I'm not saying it's not edit warring because I was in the right. Believe me, I would have been permanently blocked by now if I felt being right was an excuse for edit warring. I don't feel that it's edit warring because multiple editors also reverting Sphynxdragon before and after me. El Millo even pointed out that I was just restoring the status quo and undoing disruptive edits and multiple editors agreed with me and that my block didn't really make sense. [2] Both you and PhilKnight have completely ignored that fact, which is quite infuriating. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 18:37, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
@331dot, @JBW and @PhilKnight so if what I did was wrong, what should I have done? We tried communicating policy to Sphynxdragon, but they made it clear that they neither understood not cared about policy. They were reported for edit warring, but that report went unanswered for nearly 2 days, and then, it was only after an ANI report for personal attacks was filled. There were other editors reverting them, but they weren't around at the time, and even if they were, they would have eventually done more than 3 reverts to stop Sphynxdragon. So should we had just let them had their way, despite the fact that consensus was extremely clearly against them? Sphynxdragon should have been blocked for edit warring before I even had the chance to violate 3RR, so I'm effectively being punished for the admins taking too long to actually take action. This is completely ridiculous. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 19:58, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Admins are volunteers just as you are, and do what they can when they can. If you have ideas on how to increase the number of administrators, please offer them. Blocks are not a punishment, but a means to end disruption. You've been told how you can be unblocked. 331dot (talk) 20:05, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- @331dot if I say I was wrong for edit warring, I would be lying as that is no at all how I feel. If you at least provided me with another option to take when I'm in a situation like this, I might be able to honestly say I'll do that instead, but you nor anyone else have actually given any alternative options. And the idea that my block is to end disruption and not a punishment just makes it even more ridiculous. Even if my reverts of Sphynxdragon's edits were "disruptive" (which they were not, but rather a response to Sphynxdragon's edits that everyone else involved agreed were disruptive), as Sphynxdragon is now blocked, the disruption is gone regardless of whether or not I stay blocked. I also do not have significant history of edit warring (I might have technically violated 3RR once or twice in the past, but have always stopped before it got out of hand). So the idea that this block exists to stop disruption rather than to punish me makes no sense. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 20:26, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- If you feel that you acted properly, then you will have to wait out the block and I will tell you that future edit warring will lead to longer blocks. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how correct it was, as everyone in an edit war thinks they are correct(as you were told). 331dot (talk) 20:35, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- @331dot again, I ask what should I have done instead? If my actions were wrong, then surely there was a correct cause of action? JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 20:44, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- You report it and then be patient until a volunteer takes action. If necessary, you can monitor the various admin logs to see who is active. In the event of a less urgent intractable dispute, channels of dispute resolution are available. 331dot (talk) 20:48, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- @331dot again, I ask what should I have done instead? If my actions were wrong, then surely there was a correct cause of action? JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 20:44, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- If you feel that you acted properly, then you will have to wait out the block and I will tell you that future edit warring will lead to longer blocks. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how correct it was, as everyone in an edit war thinks they are correct(as you were told). 331dot (talk) 20:35, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- @331dot if I say I was wrong for edit warring, I would be lying as that is no at all how I feel. If you at least provided me with another option to take when I'm in a situation like this, I might be able to honestly say I'll do that instead, but you nor anyone else have actually given any alternative options. And the idea that my block is to end disruption and not a punishment just makes it even more ridiculous. Even if my reverts of Sphynxdragon's edits were "disruptive" (which they were not, but rather a response to Sphynxdragon's edits that everyone else involved agreed were disruptive), as Sphynxdragon is now blocked, the disruption is gone regardless of whether or not I stay blocked. I also do not have significant history of edit warring (I might have technically violated 3RR once or twice in the past, but have always stopped before it got out of hand). So the idea that this block exists to stop disruption rather than to punish me makes no sense. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 20:26, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
@331dot it took nearly 2 days for any admin to take action. I can be patient, but expecting me to wait that long is ridiculous. I'm more than willing to use dispute resolution, but in this case, they made it clear from the start that they couldn't care less about policy, so it would have been a waste of time. It seems pretty clear that you don't actually have a real answer on a better course of action to stop Sphynxdragon's disruptive edits. So I guess you can do whatever you want when the admins aren't around. So if I promise to never try to undo disruptive edits again and instead let them stay up until the admins get involved, would I get unblocked? JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 20:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- Until editors and admins are paid to make themselves available, that's just the way it is. As I said, if you have ideas on how to improve participation, please offer them. If a page is subject to disruptive edits, you can also request page protection. Edit warring to fight edit warring is not acceptable. Full stop. If you can't wait another 16 hours for the block to expire, as you were told above, a committment to not edit war and to pursue proper avenues of addressing this sorts of thing should make for a successful unblock request. 331dot (talk) 21:05, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
@User:JBW Out of curiosity, why is my IP blocked but not the alternate accounts that I told you about? If I can be trusted to not try and evade my block, then surely there's no need to block my IP. But if I can't be trusted, surely my other accounts should be blocked as well. Doesn't really matter because I meant it when I said that I won't try to evade this block. But I was curious. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 21:05, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
- I haven't blocked your other accounts because I have no reason to do so. The IP block you are referring to is no doubt an autoblock, which by default is imposed automatically by the software when an account is blocked. I could override it, but generally the standard setting is kept unless there's a specific reason to change it, and I don't know of one in this case. JBW (talk) 21:53, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Stranger things season 4
Hey, can you help revert the latest edit on the Stranger Things Season 4 wiki page that removed 3 confirmed cast members. Thanks. MonkeyBusiness2468 (talk) 08:22, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
November 2021 backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive |  |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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 |
Category:Films about mental disability has been nominated for splitting
Category:Films about mental disability has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:12, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Nationality, not citizenship
Hi JDDJS, in this edit to the Freddie Freeman article, you stated, "We use nationality, not citizenship"
. Is this from a guideline or consensus? It's becoming an issue again, presumably because he's now playing in a new market with millions of people. I'd like to get a clear consensus one way or another on the article's talk page, but I have no interest in reinventing the wheel either. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 05:06, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- MOS:ETHNICITY is the policy. It has consistently been interpreted as meaning that we use nationality and not just all citizenship. Examples include Dwayne Johnson (American opposed to Canadian American), Kirsten Dunst (American opposed to German American), Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson (American opposed to Greek American), Julianne Moore (American opposed to British American), and Emily Blunt (British opposed to British American), just to name a few of the hundreds of examples. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 06:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022
Hello JDDJS,
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 814 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 839 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 05:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Hansel and Gretel
FYI, I've opened an AN/I report regarding DudleyPuppyLikes2ChewHisButt/DudleyPuppyWasAPlainOldMutt. Obviously, they are socking, but since their behavior is WP:NOTHERE, I'll wait for the outcome of the AN/I to bother opening a sock investigation. I'd recommend just letting them continue for now rather than get dragged into an edit war, even though their edits are clearly nonsense at this point, and let it get handled through AN/I. If you'd like to add any info to the AN/I discussion, it is here: [3] ButlerBlog (talk) 00:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Never mind... they're blocked now. ButlerBlog (talk) 00:30, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Removal of image on List of gay characters in animation page
I personally chose that image you removed as I couldn't think of anything else better for that page and feel that if I tried to add an image of a copyrighted character, it would be flagged and taken down. But, I'm not going to say that is a great image for the page, only that it is better than what is there before. --Historyday01 (talk) 23:43, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Historyday01 I don't really see why this article particularly needs an image. Not every article needs an image. However, a cosplay of a character who originated in animation and is well noted for being gay could be argued. However, it's really hard to argue that the image was helpful. We don't even know if the cosplayer was going for Bart Allen or Wally West or if he was going for Young Justice or the comics where Bart is usually portrayed as straight. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 23:55, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I can agree that not every article needs an image, sure, but I think this article, specifically could benefit from an image. If I ever have time to find another image, I'll add it, but for now, I'll just leave it as is. Historyday01 (talk) 02:40, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022
Hello JDDJS,
- 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[a] 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.[b]
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: 11405 articles, as of 08:00, 3 November 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)
Pikwik Pack
Hello JDDJS and thank you for your recent report involving this article. The page has since been protected as it has been a prolonged target of sustained vandalism and otherwise disruptive editing from various IP addresses. If you are familiar with the subject, would you please rollback some of the non-encyclopedic language which has crept into the article? It currently reflects something one might find on a fanpage wiki, but is not suitable for a Wikipedia article. Example: [4] Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 22:38, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Yamaguchi先生 Unfortunately, I am not at all familiar with the show. I only came across it because the vandals were editing articles about Phineas and Ferb (a show I am familiar with) to include information about a fake crossover with it. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 02:20, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
NPP July 2022 backlog drive is on!
| New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive | |
| |
| 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 20:25, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter August 2022
Hello JDDJS,
- 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) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
NPP message
Hi JDDJS,
- 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) 23:10, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive | |
| |
| 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 21:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Chris Peterson & Bryan Moore
Hello, JDDJS. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Chris Peterson & Bryan Moore, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:02, 6 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) 01:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Category:Motion capture in video games has been nominated for deletion
Category:Motion capture in video games has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. OceanHok (talk) 11:38, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Chris Peterson & Bryan Moore
Hello, JDDJS. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Chris Peterson & Bryan Moore".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 22:56, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Comanche language in Prey Movie
See the discussion on article talk. The Comanche language is co-primary, both in the English version, and in the Comanche language version of the film. It's French that is the secondary language. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 20:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
The Comanche version of the film is a dub. We never include dubs in the language for infobox. If Comanche language was equally a primary language with English, they will never have even made a Comanche language dub. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 21:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive
| New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive | |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
You've been editing Phineas and Ferb-related articles for over ten years
I saw this edit then I saw this one. Congrats for being so consistent. CodemWiki (talk) 15:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
New pages patrol needs your help!
Hello JDDJS,
The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.
Reminders:
- There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
- Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
- To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive | |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
New pages patrol newsletter
Hello JDDJS,
Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!
October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.
PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.
Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.
Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.
Reminders:
- You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
- Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
- To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
November Articles for creation backlog drive
Hello JDDJS:
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.
You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.
Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
FOR THE REPUBLIC!!
|
The Galactic Republic Barnstar of Merit | |
| Thank you for editing the Rey page!! Keep it up! Babysharkboss2 was here!! 18:22, 6 November 2023 (UTC) |
Category:Fictional characters with healing abilities has been nominated for renaming
Category:Fictional characters with healing abilities has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:37, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Disney animated animals
I was looking at this tree and the placement is bizarre. One of its sub-categories is Tarzan Characters. The category includes both Tarzan and Jane Porter, who are not animals, and stated out as characters in a book, then were portrayed in many live action films, including at least one since the Disney film. To categorize a general article on Tarzan under "animated" anything, just because he has been portrayed in an animated film is excessive. However no one would call him an "animated animal." There are even characters under Tarzan characters who did not appear at all in the Disney film and so we not animated at all ever, period.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:53, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Response to your complains about my edit summaries
Hello, you complained about my edit summaries on my talk page. Most of my edit summaries that are short usually are the ones where I only add hyperlinks or references. There are times when I also add other text but as you know the edit summary has a character limit, so I can't write novels describing all my edits. Plus, sometimes I don't have the time or the energy to write a long edit summary. Wikipedia says to Assume good faith from editors.
Hope now you understood more my choices. Good day. Ninhursag3 (talk) 06:32, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ninhursag3 Here you just said added reference when you actually added a sentence to the article. Here you said added link when you actually added ethnicity to the lead (which is against policy). Here's another example. And here. I made it clear that I wasn't accusing of acting in malice. I'm simply warning you how it might come off to some people. It's just some advice that I'm giving you. It's entirely up to you on what to do with it. I've gotten plenty of advice in my years here. Sometimes I listen and sometimes I don't. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 18:00, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, thank you for your input. Ninhursag3 (talk) 19:19, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive | |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 16
An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited Graham Greene (actor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page First Nations.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
"Bill Otto (born 1956" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Bill Otto (born 1956 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 20 § Bill Otto (born 1956 until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:44, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 2
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Great Gatsby, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Broadway.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Fictional animal hunters
After closure of this discussion I created Category:Fictional animal hunters. Feel free to add more articles to it. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:57, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello JDDJS,
Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.
Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.
Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.
It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!
2023 Awards
Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!
WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.
Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.
Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.
Reminders:
- You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
- Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
- To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive
| New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive | |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Your rollback of David Corenswet lead
Please rollback your rollback. As I explained in my note when I restored the 2023 Superman casting info to Corenswet’s lead earlier today, it isn’t the future project (film) that’s notable, it’s the fact that he got cast as Superman, which already happened and has already had a big effect on his career. Most castings aren’t notable in themselves, but being cast as Superman for a feature film is because of the place this iconic character already holds in the public kind. Corenswet is in fact widely and best known now for this casting, as you can verify by googling. Every news article that mentions Corenswet identifies him by it (“the next Superman”). Charlie939 (talk) 00:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- We already had this discussion. It goes against WP:CRYSTAL and WP:RECENT. Feel free to discuss it further on the article's talk page. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 00:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Werewolf by Night
Please do not edit war. The future section does not count as a "major section" and that consensus is established across all MCU articles. If you want to change that you need to start a discussion and gain new consensus, not just keep reverting to enforce your own personal preference. - adamstom97 (talk) 12:30, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 24
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dallas Jenkins, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Director and Producer.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
David Xantanos
Hello JDDJS! At David Xanatos you have claimed that there's absolutely no reason to stall the merge
. So my question is, if there is no reason to stall, why you did not yet perform the merge? Instead, you have performed a WP:BLANKANDREDIRECT, which is decidedly a different outcome than merging. But you yourself have stated that the merge that was already agreed to
. Wikipedia's description How to merge clearly states: Copy all or some of the content from the source page(s) and paste the content in an appropriate location at the destination page. Don't just redirect the source page without copying any content if any good content from the source page exists.
Redirecting before merging means that content, of which there is consensus that it should stay, is removed from the view of all readers, together with the tag which invites editors do perform the actual merge. Daranios (talk) 18:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- @JDDJS: As I've not yet heard back from you, please let me know in case you object to me restoring the article until such time as someone decides to perform an actual merge. I would like to avoid the impression of editwar, but would otherwise restore based on my arguments above. In case you object, please also let me know how you would like to go on from here. I guess involving a third party would be good? Daranios (talk) 09:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- What info needs to even be merged into the other article? The article had less than 10 references and was mostly in universe information. Instead of wasting your time trying to keep an article that a merge had already been agreed to, don't you think that it would be more productive just working on merging the info you want to preserve? JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 15:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Seeing that lesser characters have more info there, I think both the in-universe stuff should be expanded, and the Xanatos Gambit added. I can't say in detail, because properly merging is some work which I prefer to spend elsewhere, while a simple redirection (or the undoing of which in accordance also with WP:BRD, which I thought I was doing here originally) is very fast. You keep on mentioning a merge, but are acting contrary to it. I think such an approach in opposition to the consensus in general hurts the project, and I think that's why the policies are written like that. I would like to have clarified if I am reading this wrong. I do not want to keep the article contrary to consensus, but don't want a WP:BLANKANDREDIRECT either. Daranios (talk) 20:10, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- I've now added everything I felt that was worthwhile from the article to the target. So the merge is now completed. You can add more if you want to, but the agreed upon merge has now been completed rendering this conversation moot. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 03:22, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot! So there was an overlap now between your work an my last reply. I still see more which should be added, but that's in the eye of the beholder, and so in the end my problem. Daranios (talk) 13:15, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- I've now added everything I felt that was worthwhile from the article to the target. So the merge is now completed. You can add more if you want to, but the agreed upon merge has now been completed rendering this conversation moot. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 03:22, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- Seeing that lesser characters have more info there, I think both the in-universe stuff should be expanded, and the Xanatos Gambit added. I can't say in detail, because properly merging is some work which I prefer to spend elsewhere, while a simple redirection (or the undoing of which in accordance also with WP:BRD, which I thought I was doing here originally) is very fast. You keep on mentioning a merge, but are acting contrary to it. I think such an approach in opposition to the consensus in general hurts the project, and I think that's why the policies are written like that. I would like to have clarified if I am reading this wrong. I do not want to keep the article contrary to consensus, but don't want a WP:BLANKANDREDIRECT either. Daranios (talk) 20:10, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- What info needs to even be merged into the other article? The article had less than 10 references and was mostly in universe information. Instead of wasting your time trying to keep an article that a merge had already been agreed to, don't you think that it would be more productive just working on merging the info you want to preserve? JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 15:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive
| New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive | |
| |
| You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. | |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for September 3
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Michael Greyeyes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page First Nations.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)