Jump to content

User talk:GeneralNotability/Archives/2022/September

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


NPP Award for 2019

The New Page Patroller's Barnstar

For over 100 article reviews during 2019. Thank you for patrolling new pages and helping us out with the backlog! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:17, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Here is a barnstar to show appreciation for the NPP reviews you did back in 2019. We realize this is late, but NPP fell behind in some coordination activities. We are almost caught up. If you don't want to receive "old" barnstars, please just ignore this and reply to let us know not to send you any more. Also, we notice you haven't been very active here recently, and hope you will consider increasing your participation. The backlog is relatively high and we could really use your help. Regardless, thanks again for your past effort. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:17, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 August 2022

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:58, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2022).

Guideline and policy news

  • A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
  • An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether Fox News is reliable for science and politics.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • An arbitration case regarding Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
  • The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
  • Voting for candidates for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees is open until 6 September.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:11, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Engineering and technology Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Bighorn Divide and Wyoming Railroad on a "Engineering and technology" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 01:30, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Update: Phase II of DS reform now open for comment

You were either a participant in WP:DS2021 (the Arbitration Committee's Discretionary Sanctions reform process) or requested to be notified about future developments regarding DS reform. The Committee now presents Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary_sanctions/2021-22_review/Phase_II_consultation, and invites your feedback. Your patience has been appreciated. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:01, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Objection to close of MjolnirPants SPI

Hi, GN. I'm rather severely under the weather right now, so can only write briefly, but must object to the manner in which the MP SPI was closed. I don't think he has done anything blockable, to be clear. But, per CLEANSTART,

if an editor uses their new account to resume editing articles or topics in the same manner that resulted in a negative reputation in the first place (becoming involved in disputes, edit warring, or other forms of disruptive editing), the editor will probably be recognized (as a "sockpuppet") and connected to the old account

MP had previously clashed with me on the NONAZIS talkpage and reverted me on the essay itself, and has now done so again, under an undisclosed alternate account—and, as with the last time, done so using rather incendiary rhetoric. If he wants to continue editing those two pages, he should have to disclose the account. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 17:41, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay Tamzin, how would you suggest we proceed? GeneralNotability (talk) 17:46, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Wasn't the SPI open long enough for you to comment there, Tamzin? Bishonen | tålk 17:50, 27 August 2022 (UTC).
@Bishonen: A reasonable assumption given my normally prompt response to time-sensitive pings, but I've been in the hospital since around 6 AM Eastern on the 25th. Apparently something about a difference of opinion between my pancreas and my gallbladder. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 18:01, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
I would suggest instructing HMcS to either stop editing about NONAZIS and other past disputes, or disclose the clean start on their userpage. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 18:01, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
I really hope your pancreas and gallbladder are pursuing dispute resolution, Tamzin! Please get the rest you need; I think it may not be the best time to be arguing with you. However... "instructed" by who? I think that would have to be Arbcom. As you saw, the three admins who commented at the SPI didn't suggest any kind of instruction, so GeneralNotability can hardly do it as part of their close. And for your quote from the cleanstart policy, I don't think "the editor will probably be recognized" is equivalent to "the editor must disclose the account". Bishonen | tålk 18:11, 27 August 2022 (UTC).
  • @Bishonen: Well, pancreas pulled rank and just got the gallbladder CBANned. For the better, probably. Anyways, to answer clearly why this is a straightforward WP:CLEANSTART/WP:SOCK violation meriting an instruction to desist:
    • Wikipedia talk:No Nazis/Archive 1 § Hypothetical scenario, April 2021: MP and I had a previous lengthy discussion about the nuances of the "non-disruptive Nazi" hypothetical. (We mostly agreed on everything, but that's besides the point; even now, the dispute is about rationales for a position we both acknowledge we reach the same conclusion on.)
    • Wikipedia talk:No Nazis/Archive 1 § Consensus needed for controversial and disputed claims, May 2021: A lengthy three-way argument among myself, MP, and Guy Macon. A truly nasty argument, with MP acting incivil toward me and then threatening to take me to AN/I for calling his insults what they were. The argument clearly affected MP as well: my last interaction with [Tamzin] was rather confrontational and unpleasant for both of us (June 2021)
    • Special:Diff/1104604421 by HMcS, relitigating the same dispute I had with MP in April of last year
    • Special:Diff/1105084056 by HMcS, engaging in the same kind of incivility, on the same page, about the same topic, as in May of last year
  • I have never seen a more straightforward violation of WP:CLEANSTART, and the contributions to the NONAZIS page/talkpage continued after I called it out. No ArbCom action is required, and SPI closes are not consensus actions, but rather the decision of an individual administrator applying applicable policies and guidelines. Someone just needs to make clear to HMcS that he is expected to comply with CLEANSTART same as the rest of us. He can switch back to his old account, or he can stick with this one but avoid the essay (and other past controversies), or, Hell, I wouldn't mind if he used the old account just to talk about NONAZIS and kept the new one "clean"... But he does not get two bites at the apple, two chances to contribute to the same long-term debates under undisclosed alternate identities, two chances to insult the same users while obscuring the behavioral history. That is literally sockpuppetry. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 00:37, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
    • This is not a case where a bureaucratic yellow card is needed. I've always appreciated the fact that a diverse range of people and talent are at Wikipedia, and we don't all fit a neat pigeonhole of what a good editor should be like. It's pretty obvious what's going on and there is nothing bad apart from the fact that there is yet another disagreement at Wikipedia. It's not clear to me what motivates the other editor's actions but who cares? Well, you apparently care but the solution to that might be to not worry about it. Johnuniq (talk) 10:10, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
      @Johnuniq: It's not just "yet another disagreement". The final diff above contains incivility, including a remark that I take as an unacceptable insinuation about my mental health (self-contradiction being an ableist stereotype of my condition, with "as well as other evidence" serving as a nice dog whistle in that direction). It makes a big difference for that comment to come from an account with past negative interactions with me; this is a case of using multiple accounts to evade scrutiny. And it's not like this hasn't fooled anyone... I was berated both on-wiki and off- for daring to point out what I figured was obvious about this account. He is utterly trying to have it both ways. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 16:33, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
      @Tamzin: The gallbladder probably deserved it. But as far as HappyMcSlappy, it sems to me you're starting at the wrong end. Have you considered asking them to self-identify? Preferably by e-mail for discretion, IMO. Bishonen | tålk 20:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC).

Wikidata weekly summary #536

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Discussions
    • New requests for permissions/Bot:
      • MsynBot 9. Task/s: manage existing GND ID (P227) identifier claims
      • DL2204bot. Task/s: Add ExternalID values, edit/create items, add/edit lexemes, senses, forms
  • Events
    • Upcoming:
      • Wikidata's 10th birthday is coming up soon: you can contribute to the celebration video, prepare an event or a birthday present.
      • Next Linked Data for Libraries LD4 Wikidata Affinity Group call September 6, 2022: Dominic Byrd-McDevitt will talk about the Digital Public Library's Wikimedia program, an effort to provide national leadership around access and discoverability of digital collections by leveraging Wikipedia and its sister projects. 2 years ago, DPLA launched a digital asset pipeline to enable participating institutions in the DPLA network to share their collections with Wikimedia Commons. DPLA is continuing to innovate by taking advantage of Wikidata entities and Structured Data on Commons to continually synchronize data and improve discoverability. We'll discuss issues around large datasets, aggregation, reconciliation, and other challenges DPLA has faced. Agenda
      • Talk to the Search Platform / Query Service Team—September 7th, 2022 Date: Wednesday, September 7th, 2022. Time: 15:00-16:00 UTC / 08:00 PDT / 11:00 EDT / 17:00 CEST / 19:00 GST
    • Ongoing:
  • Development
    • REST API:
      • We are continuing to work on the PATCH endpoint to make it possible to edit existing statements (phab:T306934)
      • We started the security review process for one of the libraries we are using. Until that is finished this part of the REST API can unfortunately not be tested on beta Wikidata. (phab:T316523)
      • For anything but the PATCH endpoint, you can follow along development on beta Wikidata and see the latest docs. More details at Wikidata:REST API feedback round.
    • Lexicographical data: Continued addressing remaining issues found during testing (phab:T314064, phab:T312633, phab:T312652)
    • Continuing work on supporting sitelinks to redirects under some special conditions (phab:T278962)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Tech News: 2022-36

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 6 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 7 September. It will be on all wikis from 8 September (calendar).
  • Some wikis will be in read-only for a few minutes because of a switch of their main database. It will be performed on 6 September at 07:00 UTC (targeted wikis) and on 8 September at 7:00 UTC (targeted wikis).
  • On Special pages that only have one tab, the tab-bar's row will be hidden in the Vector-2022 skin to save space. The row will still show if Gadgets use it. Gadgets that currently append directly to the CSS id of #p-namespaces should be updated to use the mw.util.addPortletLink function instead. Gadgets that style this id should consider also targeting #p-associated-pages, the new id for this row. Examples are available. [1][2]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

23:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Request for Review of WP:BLPCOI

Hello, would you be willing to review a case of WP:BLPCOI concerning an editor on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destiny_(streamer)? It would have to be via email as the relationship is external to Wikipedia. Forgive me if this is the wrong place to post this as I am a WP:NOOB Babyblasphemy (talk) 12:45, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Babyblasphemy, I'm not sure why you picked me for this, but I don't want to go anywhere near that article. GeneralNotability (talk) 21:40, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Haha, no problem. I'm a noob so I was following the process outlined in WP:COICOIN which said for things that could cause WP:OUTING one should ask one or more Uninvolved Functionaries to review the evidence over email. I just picked you from the list. Do you have any suggestions for a better person to reach out to? Babyblasphemy (talk) 22:58, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

YGM

You've got mail. Cheers, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:46, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #537

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Events
    • Upcoming
      • Next Linked Data for Libraries LD4 Wikidata Affinity Group Wikidata Working Hour September 12, 2022: Sixth session of our summer/fall project working with diverse children's book metadata. We'll be creating items for books (works and editions) in Wikidata. You are, as always, welcome to bring your own data to work on. All sessions in our project series will be recorded for those who cannot attend. Links will be added to the event page when available. Wikidata Working Hour Event page
      • Webinar: Querying Wikidata: All the Knowledge in the World. Sep 15, 2022 5:00 PM Central European Summer Time
    • Ongoing:
      • Weekly Lexemes Challenge #58, City
  • Tool of the week
    • View it! Tool - (based on Wikidata) allows viewing a multitude of images that depicts a given topic on Wikipedia.
  • Development
    • REST API: Continued work on the endpoint for changing a statement (phab:T306934)
    • Lexicographical data: Made sure that the new Lexeme creation page also is shown in older browsers (phab:T311157), which was one of the last remaining issues before we can switch out the existing page (phab:T307866)
    • Continued work on enabling sitelinks for redirects under certain conditions (phab:T278962)
    • Spend a few days with people from Wikimedia Indonesia to discuss our partnership

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.


Tech News: 2022-37

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • The search servers have been upgraded to a new major version. If you notice any issues with searching, please report them on Phabricator. [3]

Changes later this week

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

01:47, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Engineering and technology Good Article nomination

Your feedback is requested at Talk:K-Meleon on a "Engineering and technology" Good Article nomination. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Random, but...

I had to tell you that Oreo (Your dog) is adorable! Sorry to clutter your talk page with that, but I had to say it! SPF121188 (talk this way) (contribs) 13:12, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Spf121188, that sort of clutter is entirely welcome. Thank you :) GeneralNotability (talk) 22:28, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-38

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Two database fields in the templatelinks table are now being dropped: tl_namespace and tl_title. Any queries that rely on these fields need to be changed to use the new normalization field called tl_target_id. See T299417 for more information. This is part of normalization of links tables. [5][6]

Changes later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 20 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 21 September. It will be on all wikis from 22 September (calendar).
  • In Kartographer maps, you can use icons on markers for common points of interest. On Tuesday, the previous icon set will be updated to version maki 7.2. That means, around 100 new icons will be available. Additionally, all existing icons were updated for clarity and to make them work better in international contexts. [7][8]

Future changes

  • In a group discussion at Wikimania, more than 30 people talked about how to make content partnership software in the Wikimedia movement more sustainable. What kind of support is acceptable for volunteer developers? Read the summary and leave your feedback.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

MediaWiki message delivery 22:14, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry,

I thought it was a reference to Thurber (which would have been funnier). Johnbod (talk) 17:27, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Bianbum and Norman Academy

I opened a new SPI case on Bianbum. There is a new sock, several IP editors from the WindTre ISP, and several older socks. The new sock is attempting to PROD the Norman Academy article. This article was edited by one of the older socks, so it could be attempt to cover up editing history. SimoneBilesStan (talk) 15:24, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Amazing paid editing situation

Hi, GN. For the last two days, I have had an eye-popping and disturbing conversation with a close friend. I won't reveal what Draft article it pertains to, as I don't want the BLP subject to end up with a scarlet letter, but I am really wondering how typical this is. I don't work a lot in the paid editing or COI area, so maybe this is all commonplace to you ...

Your involvement (why I'm writing to you) is that you blocked the paid editor only six days after they created several undisclosed paid editing Draft articles. So here's the story, and my questions.

I got a Facebook PM from a longtime friend, who no longer lives near me. She literally stated that she remembered that I edited Wikipedia and she wondered if I could help her because her husband "had paid them for his article months ago, and yet it hadn't appeared yet", and did I know who they should contact to get their article finished. So, after much back-and-forth (in which I did not succeed in getting her to tell me how much they had paid, they are probably embarrassed to bits as I explained to them they had been scammed), I was able to decipher that they truly believed they were paying Wikipedia itself, and that that was what one did (as that was how the paid editor explained it to them). She was quite convinced they had "paid Wikipedia" (I'm not so sure if he would say that, perhaps it was only her confusion.) They went along with it because they were completely unable to determine what other route to take. (He is decidedly notable.) The paid editors, of course, have gone missing and he is unable to track them down, and now realizes he was scammed and his money is gone, but worse, he's now left with a miserably poor article in Draft space marked as paid editing. I know I did not succeed in getting them to truly understand what they should have done, and I'm a bit frustrated that I can't find a page where a new and unsuspecting notable living subject would get a plain English easy summary of how they should get an article. After much frustrating back-and-forth, my conversation with her was left with "Well, this is all very confusing, but one last question: if none of you get paid for this, why do you do it?" Good question :) If I could go to dinner with them and walk them through Wikipedia 101 it would be easier, but we now live at a great distance.

So, three things:

  1. How/where/or does Wikipedia easily direct novice BLP subjects to a page that explains, without WikiJargon, in plain English, how they can get a BLP written? She is stuck in wanting to know why she can't just ask a "real editor" to write the article correctly.
  2. How often are the BLP subjects unwitting victims of scams like this, and what can Wikipedia do to help?
  3. He subsequently told me that the editors were "recommended by the New York Times" (?????), but he paid them so long ago, that he no longer has the pieces, and (says) he can't even recall how much he paid (I suspect he's just embarrassed to say, as he is quite wealthy, and is probably ashamed).

This has given me a new sympathy for the garbage often found in Draft space; I am concerned the objects of paid editing have no idea where they went wrong, and we aren't doing enough to get good information in plain English in their hands. If I am eventually able to get any more info about the paid editors out of him, I will forward it privately to you, as it may help in your future CU efforts. But considering who the BLP subject is, I'm quite sure this is quite an industry, and this group will have created a rampant number of paid articles. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Wow. That's horrible. I've seen ads for scams like this for writing Wikipedia articles a few times, but in this case it sounds like they were targeted directly. I hope you can get some more information out of them so the scammers can be tracked down, but they are probably long gone. I do hope the foundation will take this kind of thing seriously, or at least try to do more to stop it. There's only so much unpaid volunteers can do in situations like this, and ultimately this is a legal issue (fraud). BilCat (talk) 03:07, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm trying to entice more info out of them, but I think they're pretty embarrassed. Distance is a factor; I'm sure if I had them face-to-face, I could have gotten more info, but email/Facebook messaging left them time to ponder what kind of mess they had gotten into, and realize maybe they shouldn't spill too many beans. I have gotten indications of other articles in the same industry that smell like paid editing to me, but they are too old for GN to look at and the editors were one-shot wonders. The whole thing about The New York Times makes no sense ... I'm trying to get to the bottom of that. We shall see ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:11, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
I totally understand why they'd be embarrassed. That's partly how so many scammers get away, as they know people will be to embarrassed to come forward. BilCat (talk) 03:17, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Yep ... also the marital factor ... she said that she kept telling him that he should have asked me what to do first, but he wanted to go with the "people recommended by the NYT". What is really bugging me now is I should be able to find one, plain English page to send them ... and all I found are pages so loaded with jargon that they just threw up their hands. That is, is this partly our fault? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:30, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
That it happened? No. That we don't have plain English pages? Partly, but it's hard to anticipate every circumstance. Now that now know, we can try to address it. BilCat (talk) 03:41, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
So, here's another bit ... She was gobsmacked when I told her that quite literally anyone could edit Wikipedia, and that we're all volunteers, and that paid editing is a problem we confront all the time. So to further demonstrate her naivete, she said, "I can't believe that just anyone can write anything ... you can't just do that on IMDB [yes you can] ... why can't I just talk to a real editor to have the article written ?" after I had explained to her that I couldn't either, per COI. It was just all very eye-opening for me, to see the issue from the vantage point of someone who has no idea how Wikipedia works.
Bedtime here, thanks for the conversation ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:01, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Although it occurs to me that WhatamIdoing might have some ideas relative to WMF efforts ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:06, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

I finally found Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning, which I can send them now, but doesn't address why they couldn't find good info about how to start, so resorted to the scam. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:19, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

SandyGeorgia, I'm not aware of any guides for what you're talking about, perhaps time to make one? I personally would start someone off with Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good_thing, since that is a good overview of all of the things that can be bad about having an article, plus a list of things you cannot do with it. GeneralNotability (talk) 21:39, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Thx, GN; trying to help him with this is very frustrating, and I have spent most of the last three days buried in this, and he won't really listen to me about Why You Should Not Have An Article. All of his friends, peers, and co-workers do, and it looks to me like many of them were created by paid editors that flew under the radar and are POV/promotional. And he's still convinced he wasn't scammed (does not understand the big picture): says they were "trying to get him to pay for a ghostwriter, but he didn't fall for it"). <sigh> ... thanks for the page link ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:17, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
SandyGeorgia, I think the best advice for people who want a BLP about themselves is the following from WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY: If your life and achievements are verifiable and genuinely notable, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. It's not exactly true - there are thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of notable subjects who don't have an article and probably never will. But most COI editors have no idea how to do it properly, and most paid editing outfits are little more than scams. I've personally dealt with several disgruntled paid editing customers on VRT (many of them, too, thought they were paying someone affiliated with Wikipedia). I'm even aware of one company that specifically targets notable academics.
I've occasionally come across paid editors who play by the rules and generally produce acceptable work. However in all of those cases they've been affiliated with large PR firms or specific institutions. From what I deal with at SPI my impression is that the "contact us and we'll write about you" business mostly consists of shady freelancers working out of countries with minimal consumer protection laws. Fake claims like "recommended by the NYT" are pretty common... I've seen websites that claim that all of their staff are admins, or that they created the articles for dozens of major brands like Apple, Coca-Cola and Nike.
If I were to write a slightly more honest version of what's at WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY, I might say If someone tells you they'll write an article for pay, it's probably a scam. You can try to write one yourself, following the WP:COI guidelines, but it will be very difficult and even if it gets approved, you might end up with an ugly tag on your article. Another issue is that for every genuinely notable person who wants an article, there are probably a thousand more who aren't notable at all. Spicy (talk) 23:40, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the helpful advice, Spicy. What is VRT? I had no idea this was so common, but this experience has made me much more sympathetic to the targets who may have been naively scammed. Fortunately, he's definitely not trying to write it himself; he hasn't touched it. Unfortunately, I just sent him the essay that GN linked above, and he told me he knew what he was getting into, and mentioned in fact some negative information that I had already found about him in one of the company Wikipedia articles, and he's fine with that going in. So, I will just clean up (offline) the horrible paid Draft the best I can (full of puffery, unverified text, uncited text, non-reliable sources, unencyclopedic tone ... the usual paid editing quality ... I am still just dying to know what he paid for that heap of junk), and email a draft to another neutral editor to let someone without a COI review and finish up the Draft. I can at least do that part, because there are so many sources and I need to pare them down to the most meaningful and the Draft at this stage is so bad I'd feel asking anyone to help. Even if I thought I could clean it up without bias, I don't want to end up in a difficult spot with friends because the negative has to go in, and biggest issue of all ... I sure don't want a steady stream of my notable friends asking me for Wikipedia help ... best to leave it with him that I asked someone else to clean it up. I just feel bad for them ... still so surprised at the naivete, and realizing how much knowledge we take for granted. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:11, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
VRT is the new name for OTRS.
I think the basic information should be on the Main Page. We could say something short like "Wikipedia writes and reviews all articles for free. We never charge any person, business, or other subject for articles. Let us know if someone has asked you to pay for an article", with the last sentence linking to a page that warns people off and gives them an e-mail address to report it. (Reporting it will make people feel better, even if no specific action is taken at the time.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:31, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Thx, WhatamIdoing; I just uncovered the OTRS-->VRT change last night when reading an alarming proposal at the Village Pump (read that proposal with my personal situation in mind, yikes!!!). Most happy to know that Spicy is involved there! Much more logical name, as sending people in need of help to a place whose name had to be deciphered was another stumbling block.
I agree with your suggestion and would love to get behind an initiative like that. But as someone who remains frustrated that I was unable to get a prominent medical disclaimer through, also notorious for malformed RFCs, I don't think I'm the person to initiate that. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:35, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
The first step is probably to add some links to Wikipedia:Free content, which is linked at the top of Free content, which in turn is linked at the top of the Main Page, where it says "Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." The scammer warning plus Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, to which page I have added a new (first) question: Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations#Can I pay someone to write an article about me or my organization?
After that, the next step is probably to ask folks at Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest if they think a link on the Main Page would be a good idea. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:35, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
I am pretty sure that novices like my friends never navigate to anything like the main page, though; their total knowledge of Wikipedia is via the articles of people they know. They have no idea re negotiating into the bowels of Wikipedia, and no engagement with the main page ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:43, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Sushmit Mukherjee is possibly paid editing

Hello General Notability I was checking a new wikipedia page which is created today (22 September) and I saw that the page creator has uploaded an image during the creation of the page. So I was checking whether the image is copyrighted or not and I got to know that the image is taken from facebook. There on the facebook page i saw the artist has shared this Wikipedia page link by saying that Do Check Out my wikipedia Page(check here). So I think maybe this creation is a paid edit or else the subject himself created the page. As I have selected the page for AFD as the subject doesn't satisfy WP:GNG. And I would like to ask you to look into the link and if the creation is paid editing then take a step against this. Aniaug (talk) 14:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) DasSoumik?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Maybe the contributed is connected with DasSoumik as the name of the contributer Tuhinmwiki is almost same with Trakinwiki who is confirmed sockpuppet by a checkuser as DasSoumik. Aniaug (talk) 16:03, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
GN, just in case it's not clear, my "comment" was questioning whether Aniaug is a sock of DasSoumik. Even if not, they are certainly a suspicious editor.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:14, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Good spot Bbb23, very  Likely. Blocked. GeneralNotability (talk) 21:37, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

October 2022 New Pages Patrol backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
  • On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive.
  • Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles.
  • Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Sign up here!
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)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVIII, September 2022

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:32, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-39

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Parsoid clients should be updated to allow for space-separated multi-values in the rel attribute of links. Further details are in T315209.

Changes later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 27 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 28 September. It will be on all wikis from 29 September (calendar).
  • Visual diffs will become available to all users, except at the Wiktionaries and Wikipedias. [9]
  • Talk pages on the mobile site will change at the Arabic, Bangla, Chinese, French, Haitian Creole, Hebrew, Korean, and Vietnamese Wikipedias. They should be easier to use and provide more information. [10] [11]
  • In the Module namespace, pages ending with .json will be treated as JSON, just like they already are in the User and MediaWiki namespaces. [12]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

MediaWiki message delivery 00:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you!

For the page protection Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:03, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GeneralNotability/Archives/2022/September&oldid=1116183038"