User talk:Onel5969/Archive 73

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 61: December 2019

Hello,

I am confused by your move of the Rolling Stone College Papers page to a draft page with the explanation that it "does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published." The article was a stub consisting of three sentences, each of which has a citation. In any event, I had only intended to fix a couple of inbound redlinks by creating a stub page, and then tracking down citations for what was stated thus far.

As said last month, it'd be a lot more helpful if you tried to improve the article yourself rather than moving it to the Draft space for it to rot. If you feel it shouldn't exist as an article, could I instead ask you to just move this to AfD and remove the wikilinks to the article, which is all I was trying to correct? I don't have the time to try to expand the article so let's just delete it if you think it ought not exist. Fogster (talk) 16:32, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Well you shouldn't be confused. Your throwing an example which dealt with a specific instance, which has nothing in common with this draftification, is totally bogus. And the stub, while having 3 sources, doesn't have a single valid source from an independent, reliable secondary source. Tumblr is not a reliable source, and neither is the Great Thompson Hunt. The third source is simply a primary listing from the corporate website. Not going to waste other editors' time at AfD with something so poorly sourced. Draftifying or redirecting (if an appropriate target can be found) is the correct procedure in this instance. WP is a volunteer concept, and I only work on articles which interest me, which this does not. Draftifying seemed better than redirecting, since it seemed that a case, with the appropriate sourcing, could be made that it was notable.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense! (And apologies. Re-reading my post is was way more negative than was warranted.) I thought the move may have been an erroneous template, rather than a commentary on the low-quality sources, which is entirely accurate. Sadly, those were the most credible sources I was able to find; there is surprisingly little out there. To be honest, this article does not interest me enough to maintain, either. It's been something like a decade since I did any serious editing so I'm rusty on policy (which probably shows)—in the case where I'm not going to nurture the page through the process, is it better to leave it sitting there in case someone else happens across it, or to slap something like {{db:author}} on it rather than waiting for it to disappear in six months? Or some other process to signal it needs more love than I can give it? Fogster (talk) 04:07, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

No worries, Fogster - I tend to get my back up when I perceive incivility. Thank you for your very nice response above. I would leave the article sitting in draft, as it might pique the interest of another editor, who works on it and gets it up to snuff to move back into draftspace. When I used to do work in G13 nominations (back when there was a backlog), if I found an article interested me, I would work on it. Must have done that to half a dozen or so articles, so it wasn't often, but it does happen. Additionally, a couple of months from now, you may become more interested in it and go back to work on it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:11, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, you nominated my article on the law firm Waldo & Lyle, P.C. for speedy deletion. I was wondering what you wanted me to do to make it more appropriate for Wikipedia. If it sounds like I'm stumping for the firm, that's mainly because I didn't want to run into mods saying that the firm wasn't notable enough for a page. As for conflict of interest, I don't work for Waldo & Lyle. I'm a student at a law school with which the firm and some of its members involve themselves. They took my dad's case some years back when his property was being taken and it got me interested in property rights law. But I have no intention of seeking employment at the firm once I graduate. So the firm does have my interest, but I haven't the type of interest from which a conflict arises. You'll notice that most of my contributions have to do with property rights law in some way. There's often some tie to the firm because they are involved in property law matters with my school, such as the Brigham-Kanner Conference, which I get asked to update by people who set it up because I'm involved in the property law niche at the school. Anyhow, let me know. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WBNewman1 (talk • contribs) 22:09, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi

WP:PEACOCK terms. Be fair and balanced, if there is negative news/press about the firm, include it. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me}

14:08, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Why article is directed to some other article. Can't it be sustained Festival Lovers (talk) 16:04, 4 December 2019 (UTC)Festival Lovers (talk) 16:04, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saint Johns Mission, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Reywas92^Talk 02:27, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, relating to your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saint Johns Mission, Arizona, though I am an "inclusionist" I myself have recently come around to disliking articles about lakes, at least, which have been created with only GNIS or Canada's similar source to identify a location. Like in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Halifax Lake, i argue that there is misunderstanding about Wikipedia being a gazetteer...we are not and don't want to be a gazetteer about lakes, there are too many of them and we serve readers poorly by creating them, imho. I have gained concern about really crummy lakes articles being created that were insulting to us all, based on merely the location information but padded out / "refbombed" with manufactured stuff about weather or other stuff in the region, etc., that actually had no content at all, but was being manufactured to look like it was content. About populated places covered in GNIS, i am less sure. Especially if a place article has been in existence for quite a while, and is kind of baked into Wikipedia. I would probably not like to see a bunch more created just from GNIS info though. There is no urgency to have articles about populated places if there is nothing of substance to say about them, methinks.

About possible wikihounding/harassment, that is maybe a separate concern. I followed your link to this edit accumulating a list of articles to target for AFD. Offhand, I can understand it seems "concerning" in terms of laying out an agenda but I don't see how it is wikihounding. I myself very much resented two past lists of articles in an editor's userspace that were specifically targeting me, covering only articles i had created, but there was also more going on then. Here, i don't see anything obviously about yourself, or otherwise personal. Or are the listed items all created by you, or constructed by reviewing your edits or something like that? Either way, if you do have concern about wikihoundign/harassment possibly going on, that is unfortunate, i don't like to hear of that actually or seemingly going on. Does this help at all? --Doncram (talk) 01:58, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Doncram - Thanks for your concern. Regarding the Gazetteer aspect, I understand your position. While I personally don't consider myself one, there are those who would consider me a deletionist. That being said, I think every lake, every mountain, every river should have a WP article, as should every legitimate populated place. I also agree that many of those articles are crummy, as are many of the populated place articles I've created. As a gazetteer, even if it is a microstub, a researcher can at least look up the location of those geographic locations. Regarding the wikihounding, I am concerned by both of those editors. The talk page on which the list appears was begun after that editor and I had (what I thought was an amicable) disagreement on the notability of Rugby Union players. A disagreement which that editor lost, and then felt aggrieved enough to start conversations on several notability talk pages. The second editor who added to the list, has shown a tendency to issue personal attacks on me, and prior to this latest spate of nominations has never shown an inclination to work on AZ geo articles. The list that was compiled is mostly stubs I created, so yes, I am thinking on this at the moment. And yes, your thoughts are always welcome, even when we disagree. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969, I'm sorry you view my edits on the geography stubs as concerning. I respect the work you've done and I'm honestly not trying to wikihound you. I know we're both trying to improve the encyclopaedia, and we've simply had two recent disagreements. The rugby one I kept escalating because the level of participation has been very low (the MLR notability discussion on that talk page died out before December started. I don't view that as "won or lost," either.) I also agree Wikipedia is a gazetteer, but I simply disagree the GNIS stubs I've gone through were actually populated places at any point per

WP:GNG. I'm sorry we're in a disagreement that's likely to continue, but I hope I can assure you it's not personal in any way. SportingFlyer T·C

04:04, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

I appreciate your comments, SportingFlyer, however I don't think I actually buy them. Especially due to the timing and the that you appear to be working in concert with another editor. I respect the work you've been doing on the project and am frankly disappointed in this latest turn of event. I do appreciate your civility, however. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:11, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Just curious - was there ever a point in time on the rugby issue where you thought I was frustrated with you specifically? I also thought our disagreement there was amicable, I don't know where our disagreement on this issue hasn't been amicable, and I think the timing on this issue is just rather unfortunate. SportingFlyer T·C 10:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

No, all of our prior interactions, even when we disagree (which actually is not that frequent) have been cordial. Hence my disappointment in this seeming coordinated effort. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:40, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

I understand and I'm glad to hear that. I'm not sure I'll be able to convince you it's not coordinated, though I assure you it's not - I've only reached out to that user once, it was yesterday, and it was simply to let them which articles I was planning on bringing to a deletion discussion. Best I can do at the moment is to show you I participated but didn't !vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alchesay Flat, an article you created, but rather searched for sources that would help save the article (in spite of my initial statement on deletion.) SportingFlyer T·C 14:18, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

The event was called the Premier League ok . regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.233.38.209 (talk) 12:29, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

It's an invalid link to a football match. Please stop your disruptive editing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

I made an error I will fix it now check it in 10 mins I left something out thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.233.38.209 (talk) 12:36, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Yup, see that you are now doing the piping to the link correctly. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:38, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi there. I have been attempting to document some of the local educational offices in the Bay Area. I believe this will incentivize folks to work harder for the public, and also promote transparency. You removed the page I created titled "Kian Lechner" and I was hoping to look into why, and how I can make it better. The other pages I have created have not been similarly removed. God bless, Tom --Tom47wvm (talk) 06:20, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi

WP:GNG for what constitutes notability. If you think this person passes notability, contact the admin who deleted the article, and ask them to put it in draft so that you can work on it to get it past the GNG hurdle.Onel5969 ^{TT me}

23:14, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Kyugium. I created the Wikipedia article for Dream Shizuka. After your review of the page, I can't seem to find the original article anymore since it only redirects to the Japanese pop group Dance Earth Party. However Shizuka is not part of this group anymore and became a solo artist in 2018. For this reason the redirection to Dance Earth Party does not make sense. I would like to ask you to undo your changes and bring the original article for Dream Shizuka back since she has started a notable solo career as a musician and radio host after her departure from the group. As a source, here is the music video for her solo debut song https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7i6R6lzV1L4 (the title track of her first solo album '4 FEELS.'). If you need more references or sources such as creditable articles to determine the notability of her career, I will do my best to provide them. Kyugium (talk) 11:33, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Kyugium - well, since they don't appear to pass the notability guidelines in their solo career, keeping it as a redirect to their last band, which is notable, makes sense. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:15, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

I see, do you know through which qualifications the artist's solo career will pass the notability guidelines? After reading Wikipedia's guidelines and rules on this issue, I assumed it was only necessary to provide a certain amount of creditable references and sources for the artist's activities and achievements. Kyugium (talk) 21:35, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi there - I was looking at Marc-André Leclerc just now, which was recently accepted from AfC. I did a bit of work to tidy it up, but then noticed that its author's username matched the name of Sender Films - a (terribly promotional) article that they have been editing. I've blocked the account on UPE/spam grounds, but I kind of suspect there may be some COI going on with the Leclerc article - the company creates films about climbing and climbers, he may be the subject of a film they're working on. I would appreciate a second opinion on what to do about the article - I noticed you had recently declined it at AfC, so wondered if you'd care to take a look? (Also pinging Bradv and Dreamy Jazz, who also worked on it while it was at AfC). Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 14:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi

WP:UPE doesn't give much guidance on how to handle issues like this. My personal position is to never reward paid editing by publishing to the mainspace, but I don't believe there are grounds to remove an article already there. At the very least it should be tagged for COI editing. While the article still has an NPOV issue, I don't think it rises to the level where a G11 CSD would be warranted. Bottom line, tag it with the COI and mark it reviewed. Onel5969 ^{TT me}

14:52, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts Onel. I'm pretty much in agreement: I think he's probably notable, and while the article has a generally puffy tone, it's clearly not a G11, so I can't think of anything else to be done. I'm certain that it's UPE, but I think it's the least egregious kind - someone who creates an account under the name of their employer, and edits the article about their employer, is not someone who's trying to fly under the radar - it's someone who's never read our guidelines and policies and doesn't know what they're doing is forbidden. I've indeffed them, but I'd be willing to unblock if they said something along the lines of 'Oh shit, I didn't realise that was an issue; sorry, can you rename my account 'Gavin at Sender Films'? I promise not to do it again'. As for the article, I'd already tagged as COI, so I've just now marked as reviewed - I'll probably leave it there, although if Bradv or Dreamy Jazz have any ideas I'd be happy to hear them. (Also, someone really has to take a pruning saw to Sender Films - I'm feeling that that shouldn't be me at this point, but if anyone else can be bothered...). Thanks again, much appreciated. GirthSummit _(blether) 21:41, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi Girth Summit - took my shears out. No longer a promotional brochure.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:16, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

For your defence of geography articles at afd.

Coolabahapple (talk) 22:42, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Coolabahapple - although it looks like 2-3 other editors are beginning to wikihound me. But I do appreciate your kind words. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:26, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mohave Crossing, Arizona is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mohave Crossing, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lightburst (talk) 02:00, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roundy Crossing, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lightburst (talk) 02:09, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baldwins Crossing, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lightburst (talk) 02:17, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nagles Crossing, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lightburst (talk) 02:31, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Amberwood North, Arizona is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amberwood North, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lightburst (talk) 02:39, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andalusia, Arizona is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andalusia, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lightburst (talk) 02:48, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Blake Place, Arizona is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blake Place, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lightburst (talk) 04:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Belaire Manor, Arizona is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belaire Manor, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lightburst (talk) 04:11, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parsons Grove, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lightburst (talk) 04:22, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it. To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:03, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Dear:Onel5969, Can you help me fixing this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhanush_Babu This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. (Shubham Ghodke) 06:50, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi talk:Shubhamghodke3904 - Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner, but looks like CAPTAIN MEDUSA has already taken care of it. Keep up the good work.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:57, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello Onel5969. You moved DJ WilSAF moved to a draft. He is notable and meets the Notability criteria WikiShr3dda (talk) 19:34, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Because I'm pretty sure it was created by a sock.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:58, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Mhm... I had noticed that too before making an udeletion request [1], however I did notice the previous author was blocked years ago and looking at the article's history, it needed an unaffiliated editor to work on it. The subject is however notable here in Sierra Leone. Best WikiShr3dda (talk) 12:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Dear admin @Onel5969: re-review this page as i have made some changes to it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_skaters. (Shubham Ghodke) 11:00, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Again, looks like CAPTAIN MEDUSA has already taken care of this.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

@Onel5969: Yes, Thanks for you too.. how can i become an admin on Wikipedia like you? Please waiting for your reply. (Shubham Ghodke) 11:53, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Missed this, so sorry for the delay in responding, Shubhamghodke3904. First, I'm not an admin. Second, regarding becoming an admin, the best resources to understand the process can be found at: Wikipedia:Administrators#Becoming an administrator, Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship, and Wikipedia:Requests for adminship#About RfA and its process. Hope this helps.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:21, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

My previous comment to you contained many links which prove that Mia Kim has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of her, including in Korean and Hungarian television, radio, and news publications. Rather than undo your redirection, you simply deleted the comment? Wthtvofdm (talk) 17:47, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I always remove a wall of blather when someone puts it on my talk page.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:01, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

How should the proof that your redirection of the "Mia Kim" page ought to be undone be provided to you?

Wthtvofdm (talk) 03:33, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

	Time To Spread A Little HappyHolidayCheer!!
	I decorated a special kind of Christmas tree in the spirit of the season. What's especially nice about this digitized version: *it doesn't need water *won't catch fire *and batteries aren't required.
	Have a very Merry Christmas - Happy Hanukkah‼️ and a prosperous New Year!! 🍸🎁 🎉

Thank you so very much Atsme - your wishes are very much appreciated. And thank you for all you do on WP. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I saw that you redirected the

I'm not agree.Im'unhappy,you're manytimes removes.

Damon Runyon's short story "Dancing Dan's Christmas" is a fun read if you have the time. Right from the start it extols the virtues of the hot Tom and Jerry This hot Tom and Jerry is an old-time drink that is once used by one and all in this country to celebrate Christmas with, and in fact it is once so popular that many people think Christmas is invented only to furnish an excuse for hot Tom and Jerry, although of course this is by no means true. No matter what concoction is your favorite to imbibe during this festive season I would like to toast you with it and to thank you for all your work here at the 'pedia this past year. Best wishes for your 2020 as well O. MarnetteD|Talk 17:10, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so very much MarnetteD - your wishes are very much appreciated. And thank you for all you do on WP, and all the help you've shown me. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:02, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

You are most welcome O. Many thanks for your kind words as well :-) MarnetteD|Talk 17:36, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Why did you remove my edit on Onward? 84.214.101.199 (talk) 02:01, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

President of the Marshall Islands.2409:4052:221A:1493:0:0:E39:18A1 (talk) 03:15, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thank you so much Interstellarity - Your wishes are greatly appreciated, as are all your contributions to WP. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:04, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020!

Hello Onel5969, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Happy editing, PATH SLOPU 14:51, 20 December 2019 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Thank you so much Path slopu - I appreciate your sentiments, and know they are reciprocated. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:05, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello Onel5969,

I have some pages in need of review:

Eibln (talk) 15:34, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, Eibln. Keep up the good work.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:10, 21 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

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 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)

Bravo!! Toddst1 (talk) 17:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!

Hello, Onel5969! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a

Spread the

WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings

}}

Thank you CAPTAIN RAJU - love the international tone. And as always, thanks for all you do on WP.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:11, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi pls review my draft, Draft:Debabrata Nath and Draft:Kumar Sen

42.110.142.93 (talk) 08:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2020!

Hello Onel5969, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2020. Happy editing, talk ) 13:48, 21 December 2019 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Thank you for your warm wishes, *Treker. And thank you for all you do on WP.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:15, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you as well. You've contributed so much, don't overwork yourself!

talk

) 14:19, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

I am so touched and honored by your greetings - such a lovely surprise. You help make the Wikipedia community very welcoming and special!

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		message Minard38 (talk) 15:37, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Minard38 (talk) 15:37, 21 December 2019 (UTC)Minard38

• Have a peaceful holiday and a happy new year too! --
  talk
  ) 17:33, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for your wishes as well,

GiselOnel5969 ^{TT me}

12:43, 22 December 2019 (UTC)