User talk:Kj cheetham: Difference between revisions
Kj cheetham (talk | contribs) OneClickArchiver archived Thanks... to User talk:Kj cheetham/Archive 1 |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Archives|collapsed=yes|search=no|image=none}} |
{{Archives|collapsed=yes|search=no|image=none}} |
||
== the page of Salah Barmada== |
|||
Hello, May I know why you think Salah Barmada the prominent syrianwriter and senior civil servant not notable? thanks |
|||
==Constance T. Fischer article== |
==Constance T. Fischer article== |
||
Revision as of 13:12, 7 November 2021
the page of Salah Barmada
Hello, May I know why you think Salah Barmada the prominent syrianwriter and senior civil servant not notable? thanks
Constance T. Fischer article
Hi Kj cheetham, thanks for reviewing my draft! I recently joined the Women scientists project, let me know if there are any other ways I can help out! Thanks, Coolcactus04 (talk) 00:27, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Coolcactus04, thanks for your message, and welcome to the project! I'd say just keep up the good work and add to things as you come across them. Let me know if you ever get stuck with something though, and hopefully I can at least point you in the right direction. -Kj cheetham (talk) 18:11, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hi again! Just wanted to thank you for cleaning up behind me lol. I had no idea I was formatting incorrectly, and I think (?) I learned how to use the Google Scholar template properly. I'm trying to look at what you've fixed, but let me know if there is anything else I'm missing! Coolcactus04 (talk) 01:01, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- Coolcactus04, you seem to be getting the hang of things. :) -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:04, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of London Underground Driving Motor 3701 for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London Underground Driving Motor 3701 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Note this nomnination also covers:
Thryduulf (talk) 09:52, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021


Hello Kj cheetham,
Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.
Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.
At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.
There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.
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 or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Miriam Fritsch
Hello, Kj cheetham. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Miriam Fritsch, 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) 22:01, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
stubs, or not?
As you have seen, I am poking around in the stubs and expanding on some of them. How do you decide what is and what is not a stub? For example, I agree that Barbara Baker (molecular biologist) provides enough detail to not be stub. However, Farinaz Koushanfar says little about what she does, though it has details on her education and awards. I am happy to remove the stub marker more often (as I have seen you have removed it from a few pages I was working on), I am just looking for some guidance on the metric you use. Cheers. --DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:05, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
- Hi DaffodilOcean. I'd say both of those were borderline stub/start class. The official stub guidance is at WP:STUB, with further guidance on classifications at WP:QUALITY, though individual wikiprojects may also have their own assessment criteria. An article that is no longer a stub can still be quite incomplete. The other thing I take into account is some machine learning from ORES. For those two articles, that gives Barbara Baker (molecular biologist) as "Start (53.4%)", and Farinaz Koushanfar as "Start (76.1%)", i.e. more confidence that the latter is "Start".
- Personally, I try to ignore things like lists of papers, etc. when considering the length of an article. I tend to only "up-rate" (not sure what the word is) an article if ORES is over 50% in agreement, and my own judgement agrees. In the end, it's a judgement call though. I definitely do sometimes make mistakes too. :) I certainly wouldn't object to Barbara Baker (molecular biologist) being "start" rather than "stub" in it's current state. Sometimes it's also a case of just being WP:BOLD.
- Hope that helps? -Kj cheetham (talk) 12:50, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
- P.S. I also remove stub tags on the main article if a wikiproject has already rated it as "start" or above, or even change the wikiproject ratings myself if need be. Philipp Kircher is one of the last articles I added a stub tag to, as very short, not even an infobox, beyond publications, not split into sections, as it's only a few sentances. -Kj cheetham (talk) 12:53, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
This is more complicated than I realized. I was thinking of the 'stub' tags on the main page, not the ratings on the talk page. For example a page can be rated as a stub as you did for Philipp Kircher, but not have a {{stub}} on the bottom of the article. This makes sense. I will keep adding to the pages, remove the {{stub}} tag from the main page if I think it is warranted, but leave it to you to do the ratings on the talk pages. Thanks for your help, and for coming around after the edits I make. It's fun to watch what happens after I am done with a set of edits. --DaffodilOcean (talk) 13:10, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
- Even stub sorting (WP:STUBSORT) is another complexity I don't get into myself! Lots of people write essays on stubs too, like WP:CL-RULE. I've seen lots of arguments before about why are the article stub tags and the project stub ratings not in sync. Really it's just a bit of a mess and needs literally never ending tidying. I just do what little bits I can and hope for the best. :) Keep up the good work though! If you ever want to get more into wikiproject rating, I can point you in the direction of some tools to help automate it a bit. I've even got it set up so different wikiproject ratings make the article title a different colour so I have some indication without even having to look at the talk page. -Kj cheetham (talk) 13:28, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
- I am not quite ready to getting into rating pages...though I will keep the thought in mind. Cheers. DaffodilOcean (talk) 15:39, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Miriam Fritsch

Hello, Kj cheetham. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Miriam Fritsch".
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! 21:44, 18 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. | |
