Hello. In a recent edit to the page Animal Farm, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, India, or Pakistan use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author of the article used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 01:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2018 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the December 2018 GOCE newsletter. Here is what's been happening since the August edition. Thanks to everyone who participated in the August blitz (results), which focused on Requests and the oldest backlog month. Of the twenty editors who signed up, eleven editors recorded 37 copy edits. For the September drive (results), of the twenty-three people who signed up, nineteen editors completed 294 copy edits. Our October blitz (results) focused on Requests, geography, and food and drink articles. Of the fourteen people who signed up, eleven recorded a total of 57 copy edits. For the November drive (results), twenty-two people signed up, and eighteen editors recorded 273 copy edits. This helped to bring the backlog to a six-month low of 825 articles. The December blitz will run for one week, from 16 to 22 December. Sign up now! Elections: Nominations for the Guild's coordinators for the first half of 2019 will be open from 1 to 15 December. Voting will then take place and the election will close on 31 December at 23:59 UTC. Positions for Guild coordinators, who perform the important behind-the-scenes tasks that keep our project running smoothly, are open to all Wikipedians in good standing. We welcome self-nominations, so please consider nominating yourself if you've ever thought about helping out; it's your Guild and it doesn't run itself! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators; Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Tdslk. >>> Sign up for the December blitz! <<< >>> Participate in the Coordinator elections! <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors 2018 Annual Report Our 2018 Annual Report is now ready for review. Highlights: Overview of Backlog-reduction progress; Summary of Drives, Blitzes, and the Requests page; Membership news and results of elections; Annual leaderboard; Plans for 2019. – Your project coordinators: Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to AnUnnamedUser for copy edits totaling over 20,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE January 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 03:34, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

		Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Long Articles, 5th Place
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to AnUnnamedUser for copyediting one long article during the GOCE January 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 03:34, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors March 2019 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the March newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since December 2018. All being well, we're planning to issue these quarterly in 2019, balancing the need to communicate widely with the avoidance of filling up talk pages. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. January Drive: Thanks to everyone for the splendid work in January's Backlog Elimination Drive. We removed copyedit tags from all of the articles tagged in our original target months of June, July and August 2018, and by 24 January we ran out of articles. After adding September, we finished the month with 8 target articles remaining and 842 left in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 48 requests for copyedit in January. Of the 31 people who signed up for this drive, 24 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the February Blitz. Of the 15 people who signed up, 13 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed 32 copyedits, including 15 requests. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: As of 23:39, 18 March 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 108 requests since 1 January and the backlog stands at 851 articles. March Drive: The month-long March drive is now underway; the target months are October and November 2018. Awards will be given to everyone who copyedits at least one article from the backlog. Sign up here! Election reminder: It may only be March but don't forget our mid-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

		The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to AnUnnamedUser for copy edits totaling over 8,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE March 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 19:01, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

		The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to AnUnnamedUser for copy edits totaling over 8,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE May 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Tdslk (talk) 21:49, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors June 2019 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since March 2019. You can unsubscribe from our mailings at any time; see below. Election time: Nomination of candidates in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 1 June, and voting will take place from 16 June. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. June Blitz: Our June blitz will soon be upon us; it will begin at 00:01 on 16 June (UTC) and will close at 23:59 on 22 June (UTC). The themes are "nature and the environment" and all requests. March Drive: Thanks to everyone for their work in March's Backlog Elimination Drive. We removed copyedit tags from 182 of the articles tagged in our original target months October and November 2018, and the month finished with 64 target articles remaining from November and 811 in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 22 requests for copyedit in March; the month ended with 34 requests pending. Of the 32 people who signed up for this drive, 24 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. April Blitz: Thanks to everyone who participated in the April Blitz; the blitz ran from 14 to 20 April (UTC) inclusive and the themes were Sports and Entertainment. Of the 15 people who signed up, 13 copyedited at least one article. Participants claimed 60 copyedits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: As of 04:36, 3 June 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have completed 267 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stands at 605 articles. May Drive: During the May Backlog Elimination Drive, Guild copy-editors removed copyedit tags from 191 of the 192 articles tagged in our original target months of November and December 2018, and January 2019 was added on 22 May. We finished the month with 81 target articles remaining and a record low of 598 articles in the backlog. GOCE copyeditors also completed 24 requests for copyedit during the May drive, and the month ended with 35 requests pending. Of the 26 people who signed up for this drive, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Miniapolis, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Reidgreg and Tdslk. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello. Help copy edit for article. Thanks you. Cheung2 (talk) 08:58, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Isn’t her name Vidyana? I thought that was her name Awesomegirll6 (talk) 04:43, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

@Awesomegirll6: I'm glad you're discussing with me. If you look at the references, all of them call her "Vidya Pradeep." Wikipedia should generally go with what the sources say. AnUnnamedUser (open talk page) 04:46, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Oops, @Awesomegirll6:.

Hey, I edited the page of ben vehava because he's name is ben vahaba. You can even look on his instagram page (ben_vahaba). Thank you. Eaea240904 (talk) 01:24, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

@Eaea240904: The article states that both names are used. I used "Ben Vehava" because that's the article title. AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 01:25, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Im from Scotland and nothing I typed was inaccurate. I have seen that larger pages do not reference any sort of data like the circumcision page saying that it has benefits that help against contracting HIV despite that being disproved and having no real evidence in the first places except several studies based in Africa (which does not get referenced in the Wikipedia article. The only reason I am editing small thing on pages local to me (still accurate) is to make amends to the highly out of date circumcision page in ways such as

Editing the benefits to say "several studies all based in Africa have shown an increased resistance towards HIV. Later research on this matter has shown that this largely due to

• Majority of the circumcised men in Africa are Muslim and less likely to engage in high risk sexual activity
• The men who were circumcised during the testing had several weeks recovery time in which the test was already in progress that they could not engage in sexual activity meaning they had less time to engage in sexual activity than the uncircumcised testers.
• A large portion of African men were uneducated on safe sex practices and didn't have the means to perform it correctly. The men who were circumcised during the tests were properly educated and given means to perform safe sex."

I see that a lot of the circumcision page has just never had reputable concrete evidence for the claims as it outright states benefits when the majority of studies have shown no such benefits and actually leads to an increase in infections in younger children, especially in neonates and babies due to fecal matter directly touching the glans of the penis inside their diaper/nappy. I feel the Wikipedia page should be as informative and accurate as possible on this matter as many men decide to get circumcised for these unfounded benefits, as well as parents circumcising their children (which if people were actually educated properly it would not be considered a medical procedure but a cosmetic surgery and therefore a violation of human rights to mutilate a persons body with no real benefits) TaylorRoo (talk) 09:35, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

@TaylorRoo: Everyone makes mistakes. That's no excuse for you to make mistakes. Wikipedia articles must have cited sources. Some edits may be waited upon for a source, while other ones that are controversial will be reverted because they are likely misinformation. Let's take two examples:

• A rabbit is an animal.

Obviously this is common knowledge, and no citation is needed, whereas:

• Sealand was voted the best country in the world.

Sealand isn't even a country, and there's no reference to the poll in question. Therefore, this is likely vandalism and will almost certainly be reverted. Statistics likely fall in the latter category, and that was what your edits were about. Perhaps you could give me a link or citation to a reliable source, and I could help you if you are right. AnUnnamedUser (open talk page) 15:41, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

@AnUnnamedUser: I think circumcision should have to have cited sources as its a common misconception that there are confirmed benefits and not common knowledge. In future I will cite and reference sources.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/circumcision-in-men/ Under HIV prevention it mentions that "There's evidence from several trials carried out in Africa that circumcised men have a lower risk of acquiring HIV from infected women.

But it's unclear whether male circumcision can help prevent other sexually transmitted infections (STIs).

There have been several studies into male circumcision and the risk of other STIs, but the evidence to date has been inconclusive and conflicting." Vast majority of studies since 1997 show no benefits what so ever and upon looking into the studies that do show benefits their evidence is shaky at best when actually investigated.

There are also a large number of men who are unhappy or hate the fact they have been circumcised as a child due to issues caused by the circumcision and has been a known problem for men since the early 60s but was only taken as anecdotal issues until the late 90s when doctors and researchers actually tallied up all the cases. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.0830s1085.x

I just want to make the facts known as this causes issues for men and so many people are ignorant of the facts (mainly in America/Canada and middle eastern countries). There has been countless amounts of research done the outright denies all benefits and many studies that show the harmful effects of the procedure (mainly if performed in children). There is also the issue with people thinking circumcision is easier to perform in someones childhood than their adulthood (I cant find any evidence that supports that claim that isn't solely due to recovery time and convenience) when it is actually much harder to make a clean circumcision in a child due to the penis not being fully developed which means there are extra step in the circumcision such as removal of the adhesive substance that prevents the foreskin from peeling back in children under the age of 5-7. Basically there are many many issues not addressed in the Wikipedia article and many unproven or disproved benefits that are outright said to be factual or heavily implied to be true. TaylorRoo (talk) 17:05, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Regardless your edits on Glenrothes was reverted because of "In more recent years has been voted one of the worst towns in Scotland" having no source. That was one poll, and there is no reference to it. Similarly, your edit on Scottish people changed a statistic without a reliable source on which the statistic is based. Wikipedia does not state the objective truth that some editors claim and fight over; it's about what our sources say. AnUnnamedUser (open talk page) 17:09, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --69.120.40.196 (talk) 19:35, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

		The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to AnUnnamedUser for copy edits totaling over 8,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE July 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 00:00, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

The drive had the highest editor participation since May 2015, and brought the copy editing backlog to a record low of 585 articles! Much thanks for taking part! – Reidgreg (talk) 00:00, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

There is a basic contradiction in the section on the young woman. There, it is written her identity was never known, then that people discovered and shared her identity. I explained this in the proper field when making my original edit. Choose one or the other account, or find some way of correcting the discrepancy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_erotic_very_violent

Oh, I'm sorry. I saw the deletion of the reference in the second edit and thought it was vandalism. Thanks for letting me know that I misidentified your edit. AnUnnamedUser (open talk page) 00:44, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi AnUnnamedUser. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! – Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:15, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

hello sir. marina island pangkor is a name of a reclamation island, first man made island in malaysia. it is not a corporate or a company name. other marina island that u saw is made by other people with wrong information. again. like other island, this island is name Marina Island. pangkor is the whole district of island name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yop86w (talk • contribs) 03:43, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Yop86w I am nominating the article for unnotability and apparent advertisement. Participate in the deletion discussions if you wish to challenge my opinion. AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 03:46, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

i am so sorry because not explain it. i do it because i think the others people who created in explain it wrongly. they explain like it was a business/advertisement. i try to changed it to described what it is. it juz an island, artificial island like others island. it names is marina island. perhaps i maybe consider not to put the pangkor name. but let me describe it first. what it have. i will not put any adverdtisement on that. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yop86w (talk • contribs) 04:03, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

i have ask a user that created the page before to editing. and after that i will edit back on the proper way for encyclopedia. i believe the person not understanding encyclopedia works. thank you sir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yop86w (talk • contribs) 04:13, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

I removed the website that you stated was promotional, did not realize you could add webpages to make webpages better — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moist Baguettes (talk • contribs) 02:35, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Moist Baguette The reason that I nominated your article for speedy deletion was that Wikipedia should host its own content rather than links to other websites. Also, that website appears to be a blog unrelated to the subject of the article. AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 02:37, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi! I added an article about Kiran Kodithala in Forbes - does that help with the notability issue?Filokalos1974 (talk) 04:41, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Please use the talk page on Tucker Carlson to resolve your differences with GergisBaki. Protection doesn't seem to be helping, so if you both continue like this it's likely that you'll both be blocked. Stop Now. — Ched :  ?  — 04:47, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello! I just removed unwanted links plus the spam gallery according to the regulations of Wikipedia as of 2019. I will put back some of the photos and I will add a summary, an introduction also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ioan Haţegan (talk • contribs) 17:15, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Actually these are the exact words which appear on the logo... --158.148.100.111 (talk) 17:18, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

That is the title of the home page of jv.wikipedia.org. But I may have made a mistake. AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 17:20, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Watch here. --158.148.100.111 (talk) 17:28, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

There actually appear to be two different slogans. On jv.wikipedia.org, the slogan on the logo in the upper left corner is different. AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 17:47, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Probably they forgot (or not yet) update the page... —5.169.197.39 (talk) 18:24, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

You can change it back if you want, or you can write both slogans. AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 18:51, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi, The previously used date format implies that the formation on 15 August 1947 was 71 years ago. Isn't that incorrect? I edited the date of formation as mentioned in Wiki's Official post infobox example. What's wrong in that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bittoojoshi (talk • contribs) 17:26, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Bittoojoshi, that is correct by the math. You used the same dates as the previous edit. AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 17:30, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

He was born in Benaguasil, which is in the comarca of Camp de Túria, in the province of Valencia. Camp de Túria is the smaller location, he should be categorised as a person from there. Please read WP:SUBCAT. Ignoring people when they have sources, reverting people on subjects you do not know about, and then threatening people with blocks when you are given sources, are examples of unacceptable behaviour.

The article does not say he is from Camp de Turia. Add that to the article before a category is added. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 22:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

That is actually original research by unpublished syntheses of sources due to none of the published sources actually saying he is from Camp de Turia. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 22:52, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

I changed my mind through WP:IGNORE. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 22:57, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

It's the other name of the school. Read the article on the school.--2604:2000:E010:1100:FD72:21A0:C172:76CF (talk) 16:38, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

No. The original was the more specific branch of the school. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 16:39, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

No - I put the original in myself -- by mistake. Check the name of the school. Check Cahill's Linkedin page. Check the articles on the different schools. --2604:2000:E010:1100:FD72:21A0:C172:76CF (talk) 18:13, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

I am using the branch and not the parent institution. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 18:15, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

They are completely different schools, both of which are within the U of Michigan system. I originally input the incorrect one as a link. I corrected myself. But you reverted to what I incorrectly put in. --2604:2000:E010:1100:FD72:21A0:C172:76CF (talk) 19:55, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

I may have interpreted it as vandalism for the wrong reason. Here are some signals that signified vandalism:

• No other contributions on IP;
• Different IP than last edit;
• IP edit;
• Edit summary "ce," which means "copy-edit." (Edit: Your edit was clearly not a copy-edit.)

I am sorry if I misinterpreted your edit. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 21:16, 17 August 2019 (UTC) Edit: From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 21:26, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes - I cant control my IP address; it moves on its own. There seems to be an assumption that if an IP is making edits, it is likely to be bad. This chills efforts by new editors, so I think we should be careful about the assumption. Have a nice day. --2604:2000:E010:1100:FD72:21A0:C172:76CF (talk) 22:27, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello AnUnamedUser, Hi just wondering if you could clarify why my edit on Ashes 2019 was dubious as I believe it was factual.

Thank you hope you get back to me soon. 2001:8003:3947:2A00:18D8:1A43:E0DE:52DE (talk) 21:59, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

There was apparently no source cited. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 22:05, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Persephone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Triton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:04, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

I have added the appropriate sources but the info has still not been added to the Anna Nichole Smith page. Can you clarify why? John Bernard Brown. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Bernard Brown (talk • contribs) 13:04, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

(It took me a while to realize you were a real person, not the equivalent of "anonymous".)

You had placed posts a few days ago on the Medicaid estate recovery Wikipedia article, indicating, "May Require Copy Editing... template" and "Written like a personal reflection..." templates to the top of the article.

Thanks for the helpful comments.

Anyway, since noticing them, I did try to fix, both aspects, and particularly the latter "Written like a personal reflection...".

(I knocked out some sections discussion issues that were not widely recognized and written about elsewhere, and tried to switch to a more neutral language, with words like "view" rather than "problem".)

Anyway, if you do wish to comment identifying areas where you thing the page still has a problem, please do let me know. (The only method I know that will work for contact is the talk page under the article, where I have already placed my first post seeking feedback. But if you know of another method, feel free to use it.) --NormSpier (talk) 17:59, 21 August 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by NormSpier (talk • contribs) 17:56, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

NormSpier Thank you for contacting me. I am glad that you have fixed some errors in the article. Some other problems that I spotted were long titles (ideally, titles should only consist of a few words), including too much detail as to read like a financial guide rather than a brief description, and lack of proper list formatting. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)}. 04:55, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I have now shortened section and subsection titles as well.

As I indicated, I believe the "essay-like" issues are now addressed, by removals and rewordings. If you feel inclined and have the time, if you could take a quick look for the essay-like aspect, that would help me get the thing right. (If any issues remain, you could respond here or on the article talk pages.) NormSpier (talk) 14:26, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

The article is better now, although it still needs a copyedit. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)}. 17:09, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Please see talk if you would like to comment about the lead section. --Malerooster (talk) 16:08, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello, UnnamedUser. You have new messages at 1.42.219.97's talk page.
Message added 01:19, 25 August 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

		The Modest Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to AnUnnamedUser for copy edits totaling over 2,000 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE August 2019 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 16:20, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello AnUnnamedUser. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Annie Sabo, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: being an on-air reporter on a notable network indicates significance. Thank you. SoWhy 07:24, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello, UnnamedUser. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

I saw your "Leave me a message" button and instead, thinking it linked to your email, I wrote this to you there: Sorry about that. I hit the "Publish" button by accident, instead of "Preview". I fixed those problems and hit "Publish" on purpose, then got an "Edit Conflict" message so went back to find your changes moments later. I appreciate your corrections. Activist (talk) 21:20, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors September 2019 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2019. June election: Reidgreg was chosen as lead coordinator, and is being assisted by Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Tdslk, and first-time coordinator Twofingered Typist. Jonesey95 took a respite after serving for six years. Thanks to everyone who participated! June Blitz: From 16 to 22 June, we copy edited articles on the themes of nature and the environment along with requests. 12 participating editors completed 35 copy edits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. July Drive: The year's fourth backlog-elimination drive was a great success, clearing all articles tagged in January and February, and bringing the copy-editing backlog to a low of five months and a record low of 585 articles while also completing 48 requests. Of the 30 people who signed up, 29 copyedited at least one article, a participation level last matched in May 2015. Final results and awards are listed here. August Blitz: From 18 to 24 August, we copy edited articles tagged in March 2019 and requests. 12 participating editors completed 26 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: As of 03:00, 23 September 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 413 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stood at 599 articles, close to our record month-end low of 585. Requests page: We are experimenting with automated archiving of copy edit requests; a discussion on REQ Talk (permalinked) initiated by Bobbychan193 has resulted in Zhuyifei1999 writing a bot script for the Guild. Testing is now underway and is expected to be completed by 3 October; for this reason, no manual archiving of requests should be done until the testing period is over. We will then assess the bot's performance and discuss whether to make this arrangement permanent. September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today! Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Reidgreg, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

Beeblebrox (talk) 19:32, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

		The Modest Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to AnUnnamedUser for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE September 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 17:46, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

This is a first and final warning.

Please stop the trolling. I've noticed you go through my history and go directly to content I have been working on, of which you are not a member of the relevant wikiproject and as such the content has zero relevancy to you. You then proceeded to make multiple edits which appeared as vandalism. Please stop doing so.

Thanks!

Have a nice day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smoothswim (talk • contribs) 02:21, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Smoothswim, I am not acting in bad faith. Vandalism is attempting to obstruct Wikipedia's goal to be a free encyclopedia representing the sum of human knowledge. Please do not accuse me of vandalism. If this continues, we both will probably be punished. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 02:55, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. At least one of your edits on the page The_Buszy, while it may have been in good faith, was difficult to distinguish from vandalism. To help other editors understand the reason for the changes, you can use an edit summary for your contributions. You can also take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Note: User is the pot calling the kettle black. Moved to bottom of page to avoid breaking structure. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 03:01, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the firm but constructive edits you have just made to this article. It is now worth reading. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm removing the bit about subscripts, first because it digresses from a general explanation of what an argument is into notational specifics, and second because it is so brief and abrupt that I can't tell what the person or people who wrote it are referring to. Perhaps you can address these problems. 73.71.251.64 (talk) 21:42, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

I didn’t make an error my information was relevant however I may have made a little bit of mistakes but I do think my information was relevant — Preceding unsigned comment added by GavinBilly69 (talk • contribs) 00:48, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

I removed the speculative flags on the page because other articles for "Flag of Country X" don't include a list of speculative non-official flags. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.20.114.121 (talk) 01:51, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi I am trying to Improve Jostin Francis page with references. Can you help me to contrubute and improve Jostin francis Page Thank you Darsana.vinod (talk) 05:13, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

I live here and that's what we nickname it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.56.250.130 (talk) 19:34, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Seen you multiple times on RC reverting edits. Thank you for your excellent work Dibbydib (talk!) (contributions!) 01:35, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello:

Thank you for your contributions to the lastest GOCE blitz. As a coordinator for the GOCE I reviewed some of the articles that have been edited by Blitz participants. The article you edited on Nico Rosberg was one of them. Generally speaking I think you did a good job on the copy edit. If I might, I thought I'd point out a couple of the small details I found as I went through it. If you look at the article's edit history you can scroll through them, and any others I made, yourself starting here:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nico_Rosberg&diff=next&oldid=921503438

In the lede the text read: He was the only child of Keke Rosberg. Since he is still alive he is the only child.

The complete sentence read He was the only child of Keke Rosberg (the 1982 Formula One World Champion) and his German wife, primarily raised in the principality of Monaco. This doesn't flow well and the adverb primarily precedes the verb, which should be avoided if possible. Making a small change it now reads The only child of Keke Rosberg (the 1982 Formula One World Champion) and his German wife, he was raised primarily in the principality of Monaco.

Another wording change I made was Rosberg obtained citizenship of both countries... to Rosberg has dual citizenship with both countries. He automatically has the same citizenship as his parents.

In the Junior car career (2001–2005) section He became, at the time, the youngest person... I changed to At the time, he became the youngest person which avoids excessive commas and flows better.

In the 2009 section I changed Rosberg also talked to McLaren and Williams over a potential employment; he was skeptical over Williams's mulling over whether... to Rosberg also talked to McLaren and Williams about potential employment; he was skeptical because Williams was mulling over whether.... This flows better and gets rid of a repetitive "over".

In the 2016 section this The media and fans compared him initially to the 1982 world champion, his father Keke, lessening that comparison as his career progressed; he refused to discuss the comparison with the press and was rarely mentioned, concerning the difficulty in attempting to achieve as much success as his father. is very confusing and overly long. Fans can't lessen a comparison. I edited it to read: The media and fans compared him initially to the 1982 world champion, his father Keke. That comparison lessened as his career progressed; he refused to discuss the comparison with the press and the difficulty in attempting to achieve as much success as his father was rarely mentioned.

When I am editing a request posted at the GOCE I find it helpful to do an initial edit of the article. I'll generally leave it for a bit and then do a second pass to pick up things I've inevitably missed the first time through. I think this practice would help you spot the issues I've noted here. They are small but important. Don't hesitate to get in touch if you have any questions. Thanks again for your contributions, they are greatly appreciated. Happy editing. Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:06, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Hiya. You just put this into draft space, but the article is actually ready to go. Can you undo the draft then I can carry on? The article is already sitting at User:Mujinga/draftTBK. Thanks! Mujinga (talk) 21:19, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

I would like to be able to fix my citations, please & embed them. Can you leave this page for a day or so? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhengstler (talk • contribs) 22:29, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

@Jhengstler: You may. I will leave the page until 23:00, 23 October 2019. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 22:39, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

I see you recently accepted a pending change to December 31 that did not include a direct source.

You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the content guideline and the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. I've gone ahead and un-accepted this edit and backed it out.

All the pages in the Days of the Year project have had pending changes protection turned on to prevent vandalism and further addition of entries without direct sources. As a pending changes patroller, please do not accept additions to day of year pages where no direct source has been provided on that day of year page. The burden to provide sources for additions to these pages is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you and please keep up your good work! Toddst1 (talk) 23:34, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello, AnUnnamedUser,

Thank you for creating Sport Estrella.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Consider providing reliable sources to strengthen the page's verifiability.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Meatsgains}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Meatsgains^(talk) 02:32, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

@Meatsgains: I did not write that article. I moved it to draftspace. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 02:34, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

An article you recently created, Sheet pizza, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 20:43, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I had no particular intention of personally expanding Sheet pizza (now at Draft:Sheet pizza. I was just creating a stub on the assumption that other editors would gradually add material as has happened for other varieties of pizza. It's very common, so I can find a reference documenting its existence from a trivial web search if you like. If your objection is that it should not have its own article, it could have been changed to a redirect to Pizza in the United States#Variations, where it's already noted. -- Beland (talk) 21:28, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

@Beland: You can take the task to here. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 21:45, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm afraid I still don't understand the basis of your notability objection. Would you object to restoring the article with references that show this item appears in recipe collections and on restaurant menus? Do you feel this is more appropriate as a standalone article or as a redirect? -- Beland (talk) 23:09, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

@Beland: The notability part is about Evad37's script that draftifies articles. I would restore the article if you can find references. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 23:14, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure blindly draftifying every stub that doesn't have references is a good idea, if that's what happened. -- Beland (talk) 00:19, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@Beland: Usually I do a quick Google search to find a source if the article is of moderate length. If the article is too short, I draftify because the article's clearly not ready for mainspace; if the article is too long, I also draftify because of an excess of unreferenced info. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 00:21, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

You recently reverted an edit I made on the Adam page, your comment on it was: "Dummy edit: Any expansion of "first man" theory views in science sections should be treated as WP:UNDUE and reverted." I do not understand your reasoning, there is indeed a robust case to be made that is technically possible for humans to have a common ancestor, at least down to a very small group. Why is it not allowed on the page?

Best regards, WhisperWiker — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhisperWiker (talk • contribs) 22:08, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@WhisperWiker: If you look more closely, you will actually see that I did not revert your edit. I am a pending changes reviewer, which means it's my job to patrol the edits of IPs and new users. I accept if the edit is constructive, and I revert if it's not. I may improve it afterward. In this case, I accepted your edit, because there was a reliable source.

A dummy edit is an edit that does not change the content of a page. Its purpose is to convey some information. Note that because the first ancestor theory is a scientific minority, it should not have more weight than other views. Wikipedia's neutrality policy dictates that undue representation should not be given to any point of view. Nor should fringe views be over-represented. It appears that another editor reverted that group of edits as per the discussion on the talk page regarding such views, of which I was ignorant.

Thanks for your edits! From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 23:25, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the reply! Yeah I noticed that you weren't the one who revised just after I posted on your page. My confusion regrading the situation is that the edit I made does not assert that was/is a common ancestor, it simply states that is indeed possible. I suspect that it being possible is a view held by more than a tiny minority and I suppose theres even a chance that it may even be held by a majority.

Have a great day! ---WhisperWiker — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.243.246.17 (talk) 11:42, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for improving Jostin Francis article. can you withdraw the Afd nomination? or there is something left to improve ? Thanks again Darsana.vinod (talk) 16:43, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

@Darsana.vinod: Because someone else has supported deletion, I will not withdraw the nomination. I believe that at the end of the week it will be closed or relisted again, in which case I will try to get other editors to participate on IRC and Discord. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 18:02, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Ok Darsana.vinod (talk) 01:41, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

I do not understand why you left a warning for User:MensanDeltiologist. Drmies (talk) 21:39, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Neither do I. It was petty. I left an edit summary saying it was an article in process. I went to update it with more information and sources and he reformatted the entire article. I was away from the article for less than 2 minutes. I have no desire to finish what I started. If an unnamed user is so determined to edit it within seconds of my saying I am working on it, they are free to do with it whatever they want. Just stop leaving comments about minutiae and make the edit. I probably would have changed it myself but I have quick draw McGraw to do it for me. MensanDeltiologist (talk) 21:47, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

And do not tell me I am misbehaving. I am not a child and you are not my parent.

@Drmies: @MensanDeltiologist: It is my conventional practice to leave warnings for NPOV violations. If a user were to make an edit appending "sadly" to a sentence in an article as an illustration of his thoughts regarding the content of that sentence, that would be an NPOV violation through the addition of subjective moods and mandate a user warning. To say that being part of a larger corpus of edits changes its essence is a fallacy, for that is to say that a mouse does not exist where there is an elephant. I may have erred in the judgment of pettiness, but you may accept my actions with or without the warning. You may ping me back whenever you need help regarding the article Samuel Z. Westerfield, Jr.. From AnUnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 22:19, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

OK. Please don't leave a warning template over one specific word. If you feel the need to comment on that beyond what you might say in an edit summary (you didn't say anything in the edit summary, which isn't very courteous), you can use human words that you wrote yourself. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 22:23, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello - I've reverted your move of the above article since it's not in compliance with WP:NC-SHIPS. You may want to familiarize yourself with the naming conventions if you plan on making more ship-related page moves. Thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 10:14, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Diamond Colliery Disaster. Since you had some involvement with the Diamond Colliery Disaster redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:11, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

The merge is likely to so disrupt the article that the question of whether to copyedit it needs to be reexamined. In the meantime, it is just a distraction to copyeditors who have endless other articles to work on that aren't being merged. Thus, I removed the tag. Please be courteous and do things in the right order. Cheers! Lfstevens (talk) 04:26, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

@Lfstevens: It's fine if we remove the copyedit tag, but if the merger happens and relevant information is kept, I want to make sure that we tag a section with a copyedit unless the merging user can do it himself. From UnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 18:52, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Fine to readd the tag if it is still relevant post-merge. Lfstevens (talk) 04:34, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi there,

Thanks for the message. I just want to know how to check the number of edits I have done so far and has it been published.

How can I check this?

Thanks. Rienzie. Rienzie06 (talk) 04:09, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Rienzie06, you can go to this link to see your edit count. It also includes other information like your registration date and the pages you've created. From UnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 04:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks.

Rienzie.

Rienzie06 (talk) 10:52, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

Coal in Turkey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Yeniköy and Ören

Oren (disambiguation) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ören

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:32, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:23, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi,

Can you please review and publish a page which I created.

Draft : Rinosh George

I have added all necessary citations and references for verification.

Thanks in advance.

Regards, Rienzie06 (talk) 09:36, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Rienzie06:, I am not an AfC reviewer, I cannot decline or accept articles. Please be patient and wait for the AfC team to come to your article again, since it was declined only a few hours ago. UnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 19:20, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello UnnamedUser. I wanted to let you know I am not paid or compensated in any way for my edits. Let me know if you have any other questions. Have a great day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MyDailyHoroscope (talk • contribs) 20:42, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello - I am his daughter and I have always been known as Chiggy - I hated Marion and have always been known as such! We did this as an experiment to to see if we could edit Wiki.

You can edit the page – but you need a reliable source. Also, since it appears that you have some relation to the subject of the article, we prefer that you discuss major changes to the article on the talk page before you make them. UnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 22:01, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

I was just wondering why you changed my Watford edit.

I am from Watford. A proud member of the nudist community and you have changed what is true fact. I am also a historian, i graduated from Trinity college cambridge and i did my thesis on watford. I know the histroy of it very well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.73.255.111 (talk) 23:01, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

You can change it somewhere else than in the lead section. The first sentence should be concise and state simply what it is without fluffy details. UnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 23:03, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

                                                                                  — Justin Bour did sign with the Hanshin Tigers. I don't know how to cite sources so that is why I did not do it - Here is proof of the signing -https://english.kyodonews.net/news/2019/11/c58c8025ed43-baseball-hanshin-tigers-to-acquire-angels-justin-bour.html  - 

   PhiladelphiaPhilliesFan

I am Editing this as Terry de Havilland’s son. Since he has recently passed away I wanted to correct his birth date and the date and location of his passing. I also wanted to add myself and my brother Caesar to the post as his children. I adopted my stepfather’s name as a child. Caesar spells his name differently to Terry as he lives in Australia and adjusted it to something more culturally expedient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjay66 (talk • contribs) 21:12, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

@Jjay66: Please note that you changed important information about a living person without a reliable source. Also, since you appear to be related to the topic in question, it is best for you to suggest changes at the talk page of an article. – UnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 21:14, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Not sure what happened there! Sarah777 (talk) 21:32, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Apologies - I reverted an earlier version on my watchlist. Sarah777 (talk) 21:37, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Why did you, and how are you able to, automatically, with some computer program, preventing my removal of vandalized slanderous content? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RealityCheck07 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

@RealityCheck07: Take this to the talk page if you have a problem. Vandalism refers only to edits intended to disrupt Wikipedia; assume good faith if you cannot reasonably determine an editor's attention. The gadget I am using is called Twinkle; you can install it after you've stayed on Wikipedia for some time. – UnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 18:32, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi there, Your note on why you propose that the article for Latinographix should be deleted indicates that there are "No reliable sources." The sources do actually include several reviews of series books in major national review media (Kirkus, PopMatters, Publishers Weekly, various daily newspapers) that speak to the importance of individual titles and the series' relevance as a dedicated outlet for Latinx comics creators. These are not sales pages.

Thanks for considering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.146.189.95 (talk) 17:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

You may comment on the deletion discussion page if you want to voice your opinion. – UnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 19:36, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi UnnamedUser. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encylopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog (around 6,000 pages) down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
• If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
• Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. Barkeep49 (talk) 23:26, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Hey! Saw that you nominated some redirect pages I had made for speedy deletion, but then may have rolled them back? Not sure. Either way, the contraction I used for Hello from the Magic Tavern, HftMT, is commonly used among fans and I think warrants a redirect page. An example of this currently used / accepted in Wikipedia is TBBT redirecting to The Big Bang Theory.

Brsmith19 (talk) 23:56, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

@Brsmith19: Sorry, I was rash. You might want to explicitly state that the abbreviation is used in the article because redirects should make sense in relation to the information in the article. – UnnamedUser ^{(open talk page)} 23:58, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

		The (old school) League of Copy Editors Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to UnnamedUser for copy edits totaling over 30,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE November 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Tdslk (talk) 03:43, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

		Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Total Articles, 4th Place
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to UnnamedUser for copyediting 13 articles during the GOCE November 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Tdslk (talk) 03:43, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

		Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Total Words, 5th Place
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to UnnamedUser for copyediting 25,288 total words during the GOCE November 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Tdslk (talk) 03:43, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

		Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Old Articles, 5th Place
		This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to UnnamedUser for copyediting 6 old articles during the GOCE November 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Tdslk (talk) 03:43, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on new pages patrolling as it's definitely needed. However, I wanted to make sure we are a bit more careful as recently folks had to speedy keep the AfD - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susan H. Hildreth. Being a director of the Institute for Museum and Library Services, the top organization overseeing these U.S. institutions, is a big deal so the notability for her was very high. Cheers. -- Fuzheado | Talk 16:32, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors December 2019 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the December 2019 GOCE newsletter, an update of Guild happenings since the September edition. Our Annual Report should be ready in late January. Election time: Nominations for the election of a new tranche of Guild coordinators to serve for the first half of 2020 will be open from 1 to 15 December. Voting will then take place and the election will close on 31 December at 23:59 UTC. Positions for Guild coordinators, who perform the important behind-the-scenes tasks that keep our project running smoothly, are open to all Wikipedians in good standing. We welcome self-nominations so please consider nominating yourself if you've ever thought about helping out; it's your Guild and it doesn't run itself! September Drive: Of the thirty-two editors who signed up, twenty-three editors copy edited at least one article; they completed 39 requests and removed 138 articles from the backlog, bringing the backlog to a low of 519 articles. October Blitz: This event ran from 13 to 19 October, with themes of science, technology and transport articles tagged for copy edit, and Requests. Sixteen editors helped remove 29 articles from the backlog and completed 23 requests. November Drive: Of the twenty-eight editors who signed up for this event, twenty editors completed at least one copy edit; they completed 29 requests and removed 133 articles from the backlog. Our December Blitz will run from 15 to 21 December. Sign up now! Progress report: From September to November 2019, GOCE copy editors processed 154 requests. Over the same period, the backlog of articles tagged for copy editing was reduced by 41% to an all-time low of 479 articles. Request archiving: The archiving of completed requests has now been automated. Thanks to Zhuyifei1999 and Bobbychan193, YiFeiBot is now archiving the Requests page. Archiving occurs around 24 hours after a user's signature and one of the templates {{Done}}, {{Withdrawn}} or {{Declined}} are placed below the request. The bot uses the Guild's standard "purpose codes" to determine the way it should archive each request so it's important to use the correct codes and templates. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators; Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. >>> Sign up for the December blitz! <<< >>> Participate in the Coordinator elections! <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Amy Roloff, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salsa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:20, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Antri (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mughal

SNK (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Rowe

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:49, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Reviewer of the Year

This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.

Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days

Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	Rosguill (talk)	47,395	Patrol Page Curation
2	Onel5969 (talk)	41,883	Patrol Page Curation
3	JTtheOG (talk)	11,493	Patrol Page Curation
4	Arthistorian1977 (talk)	5,562	Patrol Page Curation
5	DannyS712 (talk)	4,866	Patrol Page Curation
6	CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk)	3,995	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	3,812	Patrol Page Curation
8	Boleyn (talk)	3,655	Patrol Page Curation
9	Ymblanter (talk)	3,553	Patrol Page Curation
10	Cwmhiraeth (talk)	3,522	Patrol Page Curation

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

Redirect autopatrol

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.

Source Guide Discussion

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.

This month's refresher course

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for continuing to make Wikipedia the greatest project in the world. I hope you have an excellent holiday season. Lightburst (talk) 02:09, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

		The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to UnnamedUser for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE December 2019 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 22:15, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

I wanted to discuss the Sighthound & Pariah Dog Group Page. I find the redirect to be confusing, as Pariah Dogs are not included on the Sighthound Page, but they do have their own page. You saw my solution, but I’m quite new to editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.61.121.29 (talk) 19:55, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguations should disambiguate between two pages. If a redirect might be confusing, you can leave a hatnote at the top of the redirect target with {{hatnote}}. – UnnamedUser (talk; contribs) 19:58, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Hello UnnamedUser:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Donner60 (talk) 00:12, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks (static)}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

• 
• 
• 

Happy New Year!

• 
  MMXX Lunar Calendar

UnnamedUser,
Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

---

   – 2020 is a leap year – news article.
   – Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2020}} to user talk pages.

– Utopes (talk) 09:01, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Sir/Mam, I reverted your edits back because you corrected some sentences which were factually incorrect as no sources were provided for those. So please excuse me. Thanking you Karna DV (talk) 13:36, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

User "Tresson Philander" made changes without citing sources. And you are supporting him. There are no sources. So I reverted back Karna DV (talk) 09:43, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

@Karna DV: I was copy editing; it is better to do that than to leave a cleanup tag while patrolling recent changes. The first thing I am doing is judging that it is not vandalism, and after that I add the necessary tags or clean the edit up. I did not add a {{citation needed}} tag because the article already has a {{more citations needed}} tag. – UnnamedUser (talk; contribs) 16:23, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

On your article list for the Guild of Copy Editors Drive, you have listed 1 complete article with its word count on the outside, yet not on the inside. Would you mind clarifying so I can update the leaderboard? Thanks, Thatoneweirdwikier Say hi 19:25, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

@Thatoneweirdwikier: I am not finished editing the article. I prefer to add my totals first as a habit. – UnnamedUser (talk; contribs) 19:39, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Good to know. Thanks, Thatoneweirdwikier Say hi 19:45, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Dear Unnamed User,

Thank you for your response below. (I may not be writing this message to you in the proper place, as I am not familiar with all the protocols of Wikipedia.

I believe I found out who deleted most of my Wikipedia page and sent him/her a message (to the best of my ability). I have restored the most important parts of my site, attempting to document everything that could be documented and removing any statements that could not be documented or that had the slightest appearance of self promotion. Only the facts are stated on the site now, with no value judgements. I have asked the person who I think deleted most of the site (Anarchyte) to take a look and let me know what remains to be documented. I would be grateful if you could do the same. My Wikipedia site is important to me. I also do not want anything on it that is objectionable in any way. My email address is lightman@mit.edu. I prefer getting messages from you at that place.

Thank you. Alan Lightman Lightmanalan1 (talk) 13:49, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Dear Unnamed User,

You or another editor recently deleted a large portion of my Wikipedia page. I would be happy to work with you to reduce some of the content of the previous page, but I believe that you have deleted too much in the current version -- probably around 75% of it or more. For example, you deleted the entire section on my literary work. I just restored a few lines of that now. I apologize for adding as much content to the site as I did, but I respectfully suggest that you went overboard in trimming it down. I would be grateful if we could discuss restoring a modest portion of what was there before.

Sincerely, Alan Lightman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lightmanalan1 (talk • contribs) 02:50, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

@Alan Lightman: I did not remove content from your Wikipedia page. All I did was patrol edits from new users as usual and welcome you. You can check the page's history to see who deleted the information. It is best to take the issue to the page's talk page because more users can see your complaints there. Also, note that even if information about you is true, it cannot be included on Wikipedia if no reliable sources can confirm the info. – UnnamedUser (talk; contribs) 02:55, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

@Lightmanalan1: sorry for the incorrect ping. – UnnamedUser (talk; contribs) 03:13, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello! You reviewed the page of Benjamin Z M Lee. However, another user moved it back to the draftspace and didn't detail on the reason. I submitted it again as I think the page is good. Just letting you know as you participated --Wiserared (talk) 21:28, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello Is there an email address for Mehdi Dehbi's official team to get in touch with you? Some edits daily added are fasle and completely unsourced. Thank you. Team MDMdehbi (talk) 03:29, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Mdehbi: You can directly talk to me on my talk page. It is preferred for these kinds of concerns to be discussed in public to allow others to help solve the problem. – UnnamedUser (talk; contribs) 18:25, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello,

We would appreciate exchanging by email for authenticiy and to understand who we are exchanging with. Since that seems to be difficult, please have in mind that this article from La Libre Belgique

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). https://www.lalibre.be/culture/medias-tele/mehdi-dehbi-l-etoile-eclairee-51b8d078e4b0de6db9c0a0c3

used by your editors as a source is defamatory and incorrect. Dehbi's team are in legal procedure to have those false information removed. We are not here to disturb any Wikipedia rule and we understand your rule about conflict of interest, but we are also determined to pursue the veracity and authenticiy of facts specifically those stating race or ethnicity. It is not a subject to be taken lightly or to be approximative with.

Thank you for your understanding. We would appreciate your coopration until the legal procedure is over.

Respectfully, Mehdi Dehbi's team Mdehbi (talk) 00:49, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

@Mdehbi: You can place {{Disputed inline}} after disputed statements and the {{Disputed}} tag at the top of the article. You can also take the issue to the biographies of living people noticeboard and follow the instructions at the top of the page. If you have doubts about the source's authenticity, you can discuss its reliability as the reliable sources noticeboard. I am not familiar with such procedures and as such cannot offer much help, and it is better to use Talk:Mehdi Dehbi. – UnnamedUser (talk; contribs) 02:22, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list

The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. The goal of the talk pages project is to help contributors communicate on wiki more easily. This project is the result of the Talk pages consultation 2019.

The team is building a new tool for replying to comments now. This early version can sign and indent comments automatically. Please test the new Reply tool.

• On 31 March 2020, the new reply tool was offered as a Beta Feature editors at four Wikipedias: Arabic, Dutch, French, and Hungarian. If your community also wants early access to the new tool, contact User:Whatamidoing (WMF).
• The team is planning some upcoming changes. Please review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page. The team will test features such as:
  • an easy way to mention another editor ("pinging"),
  • a rich-text visual editing option, and
  • other features identified through user testing or recommended by editors.

To hear more about Editing Team updates, please add your name to the "Get involved" section of the project page. You can also watch these pages: the main project page, Updates, Replying, and User testing.

– PPelberg (WMF) (talk) & Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:45, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list

This edition of the Editing newsletter includes information the Wikipedia:Talk pages project, an effort to help contributors communicate on wiki more easily. The central project page is on MediaWiki.org.

• Reply tool: This is available as a Beta Feature at the four partner wikis (Arabic, Dutch, French, and Hungarian Wikipedias). The Beta Feature will get new features soon. The new features include writing comments in a new visual editing mode and pinging other users by typing @. You can test the new features on the Beta Cluster. Some other wikis will have a chance to try the Beta Feature in the coming months.
• New requirements for user signatures: Soon, users will not be able to save invalid custom signatures in Special:Preferences. This will reduce signature spoofing, prevent page corruption, and make new talk page tools more reliable. Most editors will not be affected.
• New discussion tool: The Editing team is beginning work on a simpler process for starting new discussions. You can see the initial design on the project page.
• Research on the use of talk pages: The Editing team worked with the Wikimedia research team to study how talk pages help editors improve articles. We learned that new editors who use talk pages make more edits to the main namespace than new editors who don't use talk pages.

– Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Seven years ago this week, the Editing team made the visual editor available by default to all logged-in editors using the desktop site at the English Wikipedia. Here's what happened since its introduction:

• The 50 millionth edit using the visual editor on desktop was made this year. More than 10 million edits have been made here at the English Wikipedia.
• More than 2 million new articles have been created in the visual editor. More than 600,000 of these new articles were created during 2019.
• Almost 5 million edits on the mobile site have been made with the visual editor. Most of these edits have been made since the Editing team started improving the mobile visual editor in 2018.
• The proportion of all edits made using the visual editor has been increasing every year.
• Editors have made more than 7 million edits in the 2017 wikitext editor, including starting 600,000 new articles in it. The 2017 wikitext editor is VisualEditor's built-in wikitext mode. You can enable it in your preferences.
• On 17 November 2019, the first edit from outer space was made in the mobile visual editor.
• In 2019, 35% of the edits by newcomers, and half of their first edits, were made using the visual editor. This percentage has been increasing every year since the tool became available.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:05, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

The Reply tool has been available as a Beta Feature at the Arabic, Dutch, French and Hungarian Wikipedias since 31 March 2020. The first analysis showed positive results.

• More than 300 editors used the Reply tool at these four Wikipedias. They posted more than 7,400 replies during the study period.
• Of the people who posted a comment with the Reply tool, about 70% of them used the tool multiple times. About 60% of them used it on multiple days.
• Comments from Wikipedia editors are positive. One said, أعتقد أن الأداة تقدم فائدة ملحوظة؛ فهي تختصر الوقت لتقديم رد بدلًا من التنقل بالفأرة إلى وصلة تعديل القسم أو الصفحة، التي تكون بعيدة عن التعليق الأخير في الغالب، ويصل المساهم لصندوق التعديل بسرعة باستخدام الأداة. ("I think the tool has a significant impact; it saves time to reply while the classic way is to move with a mouse to the Edit link to edit the section or the page which is generally far away from the comment. And the user reaches to the edit box so quickly to use the Reply tool.")[1]

The Editing team released the Reply tool as a Beta Feature at eight other Wikipedias in early August. Those Wikipedias are in the Chinese, Czech, Georgian, Serbian, Sorani Kurdish, Swedish, Catalan, and Korean languages. If you would like to use the Reply tool at your wiki, please tell User talk:Whatamidoing (WMF).

The Reply tool is still in active development. Per request from the Dutch Wikipedia and other editors, you will be able to customize the edit summary. (The default edit summary is "Reply".) A "ping" feature is available in the Reply tool's visual editing mode. This feature searches for usernames. Per request from the Arabic Wikipedia, each wiki will be able to set its own preferred symbol for pinging editors. Per request from editors at the Japanese and Hungarian Wikipedias, each wiki can define a preferred signature prefix in the page MediaWiki:Discussiontools-signature-prefix. For example, some languages omit spaces before signatures. Other communities want to add a dash or a non-breaking space.

• The new requirements for custom user signatures began on 6 July 2020. If you try to create a custom signature that does not meet the requirements, you will get an error message.
• Existing custom signatures that do not meet the new requirements will be unaffected temporarily. Eventually, all custom signatures will need to meet the new requirements. You can check your signature and see lists of active editors whose custom signatures need to be corrected. Volunteers have been contacting editors who need to change their custom signatures. If you need to change your custom signature, then please read the help page.

Next, the team will be working on a tool for quickly and easily starting a new discussion section to a talk page. To follow the development of this new tool, please put the New Discussion Tool project page on your watchlist.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:47, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

cry about it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.74.112.112 (talk) 23:53, 24 September 2020 (UTC) 

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

The Reply tool is available at most other Wikipedias.

• The Reply tool has been deployed as an opt-out preference to all editors at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.
• It is also available as a Beta Feature at almost all Wikipedias except for the English, Russian, and German-language Wikipedias. If it is not available at your wiki, you can request it by following these simple instructions.

Research notes:

• As of January 2021, more than 3,500 editors have used the Reply tool to post about 70,000 comments.
• There is preliminary data from the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedia on the Reply tool. Junior Contributors who use the Reply tool are more likely to publish the comments that they start writing than those who use full-page wikitext editing.[2]
• The Editing and Parsing teams have significantly reduced the number of edits that affect other parts of the page. About 0.3% of edits did this during the last month.[3] Some of the remaining changes are automatic corrections for Special:LintErrors.
• A large A/B test will start soon.[4] This is part of the process to offer the Reply tool to everyone. During this test, half of all editors at 24 Wikipedias (not including the English Wikipedia) will have the Reply tool automatically enabled, and half will not. Editors at those Wikipeedias can still turn it on or off for their own accounts in Special:Preferences.

The new tool for starting new discussions (new sections) will join the Discussion tools in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures at the end of January. You can try the tool for yourself.[5] You can leave feedback in this thread or on the talk page.

During Talk pages consultation 2019, editors said that it should be easier to know about new activity in conversations they are interested in. The Notifications project is just beginning. What would help you become aware of new comments? What's working with the current system? Which pages at your wiki should the team look at? Please post your advice at mw:Talk:Talk pages project/Notifications.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

Earlier this year, the Editing team ran a large study of the Reply Tool. The main goal was to find out whether the Reply Tool helped newer editors communicate on wiki. The second goal was to see whether the comments that newer editors made using the tool needed to be reverted more frequently than comments newer editors made with the existing wikitext page editor.

The key results were:

• Newer editors who had automatic ("default on") access to the Reply tool were more likely to post a comment on a talk page.
• The comments that newer editors made with the Reply Tool were also less likely to be reverted than the comments that newer editors made with page editing.

These results give the Editing team confidence that the tool is helpful.

Looking ahead

The team is planning to make the Reply tool available to everyone as an opt-out preference in the coming months. This has already happened at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.

The next step is to resolve a technical challenge. Then, they will deploy the Reply tool first to the Wikipedias that participated in the study. After that, they will deploy it, in stages, to the other Wikipedias and all WMF-hosted wikis.

You can turn on "Discussion Tools" in Beta Features now. After you get the Reply tool, you can change your preferences at any time in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

00:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list for the multilingual newsletter • Local subscription list

The New topic tool helps editors create new ==Sections== on discussion pages. New editors are more successful with this new tool. You can read the report. Soon, the Editing team will offer this to all editors at most WMF-hosted wikis. You can join the discussion about this tool for the English Wikipedia is at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Enabling the New Topic Tool by default. You will be able to turn it off in the tool or at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

The Editing team plans to change the appearance of talk pages. These are separate from the changes made by the mw:Desktop improvements project and will appear in both Vector 2010 and Vector 2022. The goal is to add some information and make discussions look visibly different from encyclopedia articles. You can see some ideas at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project#Prototype Ready for Feedback.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

23:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

The new [subscribe] button notifies people when someone replies to their comments. It helps newcomers get answers to their questions. People reply sooner. You can read the report. The Editing team is turning this tool on for everyone. You will be able to turn it off in your preferences.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:35, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

This newsletter includes two key updates about the Editing team's work:

1. The Editing team will finish adding new features to the Talk pages project and deploy it.
2. They are beginning a new project, Edit check.

Talk pages project

The Editing team is nearly finished with this first phase of the Talk pages project. Nearly all new features are available now in the Beta Feature for Discussion tools.

It will show information about how active a discussion is, such as the date of the most recent comment. There will soon be a new "Add topic" button. You will be able to turn them off at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion. Please tell them what you think.

An A/B test for Discussion tools on the mobile site has finished. Editors were more successful with Discussion tools. The Editing team is enabling these features for all editors on the mobile site.

New Project: Edit Check

The Editing team is beginning a project to help new editors of Wikipedia. It will help people identify some problems before they click "Publish changes". The first tool will encourage people to add references when they add new content. Please watch that page for more information. You can join a conference call on 3 March 2023 to learn more.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC)