Jump to content

User talk:Hey man im josh/Archive 10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Hey man im josh
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 07:32, 12 September 2023 (Archiving 1 discussion(s) from User talk:Hey man im josh) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Archive 5←Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12→Archive 15

Un reviewed or reviewed?

Dear User, thank you for your important contributions, but may I ask you why?

Even if this article is still incomplete (no women results yet) I think that these championships could be considered as reviewed. Am I wrong? Arorae (talk) 21:52, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

@Arorae: That wasn't just the same hour, it was the same minute. I did not want to personally have marked it as reviewed because the events have been completed but the women's table was largely incomplete. While I do believe the article would survive at AfD, if sent there, it's a personal preference of mine not to mark an incomplete past event's article as reviewed. Not a big deal, but I'm sorry to have inconvenienced and/or confused you with this action. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:13, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
As I wrote twice the time “12:33”, it looks more like the very same “second” not hour. (I wrote “hour” by mistake, my English is not very good). Of course, I do also believe that this article will not be sent at AfD or Draft space, but unfortunately it already happened. As previously said it is incomplete but very accurate on the men’s results - as I have checked every athlete and his result one by one. Arorae (talk) 00:00, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
@Arorae: I think your English is better than you're giving yourself credit for. I also believe the article is accurate for the men's table. It's just that I don't like to mark articles as reviewed when they are from past events and they are incomplete. I wouldn't mark the article as unreviewed if someone else marked it as reviewed, but when I did so with that article I immediately realized I went against my own practices. If you finish the women's table I'd be more than happy to mark it as reviewed. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:10, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks again for your explanations and compliments. But it took me too much time to complete the men’s section only and if anyone else wants to finish the women’s section, I will be quite happy too. But I will not. I am not even an Australian and there is so much work to do just for athletics, especially these months with new results at every hour. As you said, those championships were held last April, and very few fans seem to be interested in. My pleasure by the way. Arorae (talk) 00:24, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Hey man im josh. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:02, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

"Unreliable Sources" on Texas Gubernatorial Election Articles???

I don't understand why you marked my pages regarding Texas gubernatorial elections from 1910-1922 as having "unreliable sources." They are double sourced from OurCampaigns and the Texas Almanac. I don't really know what more you're asking for here. Would like an explanation Trajan1 (talk) 16:42, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

@Trajan1: I only marked 1916 Texas gubernatorial election as having unreliable sources, not the other articles in that range. I did so because Our Campaigns is considered generally unreliable due to its publishing of user-generated content. A non-exhaustive list of Wikipedia's assessment of sources can be found at WP:RSPSS. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:48, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Understood. Thank you for explanation. I just added references to Texas Almanac on the articles, and they match. Thank you for keeping me honest. Trajan1 (talk) 16:54, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
@Trajan1: It's near impossible to know everything about Wikipedia so I wouldn't expect you to be aware of that. Thank you for the work you're doing. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:56, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks :) Trajan1 (talk) 17:01, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Two dashes

Can you explain the nuance of how there are two different dashes? I see that one is slightly longer than the other but for the life of me I can't create the long one... My keyboard yields "-"... Copy pasting what my keyboard yields gets me "-"... and copy pasting from the "long" version gets me "-" which is as far as I can tell the exact same as the other two. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:24, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Horse Eye's Back: Are you familiar with alt codes? You can hold down the alt key on your keyboard, type the numbers 0150, then let go of the alt key to get the en dash. If you're asking why I used that dash, I did so because it's meant to be used for relationships and connections between two things. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:38, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
The en dash is the short one and the em dash is the long one. You replaced an en dash with an em dash not the other way around. I originally thought we were talking about two different ways to denote an en dash, it never crossed my mind that you might be trying to insert an em dash. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:00, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
@Horse Eye's Back: I replaced a hyphen with an en dash.
Hyphen: Libya-Taiwan relations (original page title)
En dash: Libya–Taiwan relations (location I moved the page to)
Em dash: Libya—Taiwan relations
Are you by chance thinking of a hyphen and en dash as the same thing? Hey man im josh (talk) 17:08, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Is there supposed to be a difference between them over all versions? Wikipedia appears to be rendering the two dashes identically in the browser version and in the mobile viewer all three are rendered identically. And in the edit function all three are rendered identically both places, go look in the edit view... The three versions are the exact same length down to the pixel. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:15, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Edit view also seems to render the minus sign the same way or to put it another way I think it might be rendering everything as a minus sign in edit view. Anyways that for me clears it up, there is some sort of coding for the different signs but it can't be seen in the visual representation of the data in edit mode. Something to bring up at a specialized forum, not to waste more of your talk page on. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:27, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
@Horse Eye's Back: I took a couple screenshots of how it looks on my browser and uploaded them here. I'm using Google Chrome Version 113.0.5672.129 (64-bit) for reference. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:30, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
Excellent data, thank you very much. I wonder if the lack of differentiation in edit view is something that can be fixed. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:41, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
It's definitely more obvious outside of edit view (for me at least). Hey man im josh (talk) 17:53, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

NPP May 2023 Drive Awards

Redirect Ninja Award
This award is given to Hey man im josh for collecting more than 2000 points doing redirect reviews, in the May 2023 NPP backlog reduction drive. Thank you for your contributions . Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 16:14, 4 June 2023 (UTC)


The Content Review Medal of Merit  
This award is given to Hey man im josh for collecting the most points doing redirect reviews, in the May 2023 NPP backlog reduction drive. Thank you for your contributions. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 16:14, 4 June 2023 (UTC)


Unnecessarily complicated Gears Award

This award is given to Hey man im josh for collecting more than 600 points per week doing reviews, in the May 2023 NPP backlog reduction drive. Thank you for your contributions Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 16:14, 4 June 2023 (UTC)


Congrats on coming first. — Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 16:14, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Congrats Josh. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:09, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
  • As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

  • Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:33, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Nominated?

Hi, I see you have nominated me for Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect autopatrol list. Can I have some context about what this is? Dont get me wrong, I am more than willing to take more work here, In fact I am looking for stuff. Could you explain to me, perhaps point me to somewhere that can explain what this specific role is? >>> Extorc.talk 17:21, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Extorc. The goal of the nomination I made is actually to reduce the work of the New Page Patrol team, not to ask anybody to put work in. Per WP:RWHITELIST, "This autopatrol list is designed to grant a pseudoright to users who have a track record of creating redirects but do not qualify for autopatrolled. Users with autopatrolled do not need this pseudoright and should not be included on this list. Users on this list may have their created redirects patrolled by a bot."
In short, you have a decent history when it comes to creating redirects so I nominated you to be on a list of people. Redirects created by people on that list are automatically marked as reviewed every 15 minutes (normally) by a bot. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:29, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Oh, thanks for this. >>> Extorc.talk 17:38, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
No no, thank YOU for putting the effort in! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:55, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Say it ain't so

DID YOU START THOSE FIRES, LOL? Bringingthewood (talk) 20:20, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Bringingthewood if only I could claim responsibility. Alas, I gave up my pyromantic hobbies once I became an adult. Now that I'm an adult I do adult things, which includes me going to get a new furnace filter in an hour since apparently I'm going to have to keep my windows shut. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

LOL!! Seems like my thinking wasn't that far off! I always knew the Bronx was burning ... but this is ridiculous. I wish you luck with your furnace filter and stay safe. Regards, Bringingthewood (talk) 23:54, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Category:100 Sacks Club has been nominated for deletion

Category:100 Sacks Club has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 15:29, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Page triage

I see you just reviewed one of my redirects at Country Bear Vacation Hoedown. I've never seen this before and I'm curious what happened to get me on your radar. Was it flagged for some reason? I do a lot of redirects, but this is new territory. Was it something to do w/ the IP that's been fighting the edit? Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 20:44, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Just Another Cringy Username. The redirect appeared in the new page queue, which I regularly patrol. Looking at the page history, this happened because the page was converted from a redirect to an article and then back again. When a page is change from a redirect to an article, or vice versa, it's automatically placed in the queue that members of the New Page Patrol team review. I marked it as reviewed because the redirect target made sense. Hey man im josh (talk) 01:11, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Just a joke

Hey man im here to help you. I'm Here to Help You (talk) 11:07, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Redirect reviewing

Thanks for all your reviewing, and I’ve also installed Capricorn ♑️ so that you guys don’t have to do the categorising yourself. Fork99 (talk) 14:21, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Categorizing would definitely be helpful, thanks for the consideration @Fork99. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:21, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

VALNET

Hi. Going by your comment at WP:AFC/R ("Targeted to Valnet, as suggested by a user above."), I think maybe you meant to redirect VALNET to Valnet, instead of its current target United States Department of Veterans Affairs. --2001:1C06:19CA:D600:C259:E23D:2A40:75EB (talk) 19:03, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

I absolutely did mean to target Valnet. I do recall entering it into the box, so that's weird. Thank you for pointing this out to me, I've fixed it. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:05, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Ben Moody

It was an intentional secret code! Okay not really, I was editing while talking to someone and missed a bit. Thanks for the clarifier :) -- Euryalus (talk) 20:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

@Euryalus: Could have won the prize if I spent the time trying to decode instead of help, grrr! No problem at all, happens to the best of us. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:47, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

The Lost Crown

Hi. Sure. Are you willing to create disambiguation page The Lost Crown, and on it link to both The Lost Crown: A Ghost-Hunting Adventure and Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown? --2001:1C06:19CA:D600:F435:805D:777C:F129 (talk) 17:02, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

I've made a disambiguation page at The Lost Crown. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:47, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
Great, thanks. --2001:1C06:19CA:D600:C6A7:9F93:6B9A:E241 (talk) 15:55, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Category:10,000 receiving yards club has been nominated for deletion

Category:10,000 receiving yards club has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 21:59, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Complete agree with this nomination. Created when I was a newer user and it's absolutely an arbitrary category. G7 tagged and archiving. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:08, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Category:Ed Block Courage Award recipients has been nominated for deletion

Category:Ed Block Courage Award recipients has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:Namiba 23:12, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Colin Leonard

Hey man im josh

Thank you for reviewing the additional content and citations for Colin Leonard's article. I really appreciate it! When will the "article for deletion" be removed from the top of his article?

Best,

Landplane123 (talk) 19:04, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Landplane123: All articles sent to AfD are marked as reviewed by the New Page Patrol team as a matter of procedure. The articles for deletion information at the top of the article must remain there until the deletion discussion has concluded. Articles listed at AfD are normally discussed for at least seven days, after which the deletion process proceeds based on community consensus. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:10, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Got it! Landplane123 (talk) 19:24, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1917–18 NHL standings templates

A tag has been placed on Category:1917–18 NHL standings templates indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:18, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

For my future reference, the template in this category was deleted as a result of Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2023_June_20#Template:1917–18_NHL_standings. Hey man im josh (talk) 01:21, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1660s in Croatia

A tag has been placed on Category:1660s in Croatia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 07:20, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Years of the 17th century in Croatia

A tag has been placed on Category:Years of the 17th century in Croatia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 07:20, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Left out a credit

on the series "Hunter" Fred Dryer wasn't just an actor, he also director of multiple episodes 174.164.105.111 (talk) 19:44, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023

Hello Hey man im josh,

New Page Review queue April to June 2023

Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of Sam, Jason and Susana, and also some patches from Jon, has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders

Thanks for reviewing all of those redirect, Josh! So many redirects are created, I didn't previously know that reviewers checked them out. That's good news! Liz Read! Talk! 00:45, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks @Liz! A lot of people aren't aware until they receive a "your page has been reviewed" notification :p Hey man im josh (talk) 16:42, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Question

Hello HMIJ

You know I ask before reading .... but is the 100 sack club gone? Never saw so many watchlist players show up in one day. Besides I need someone to send a message back to me, so I know it still works. :) Bringingthewood (talk) 00:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Bringingthewood. Yes, the category has been deleted. It was a category I created when I was a new user and it was nominated for deletion. I agreed with the nominator's rationale (WP:ARBITRARYCAT) and I tagged it with a G7 CSD tag. The category was deleted and I removed the category from the relevant pages. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

That sucks! Nah, I don't agree, I never would have done that to you, lol. Besides, I've been rooting for T. J. Watt since 2017 to reach that mark. Let's put it back when he gets there! ; )

Thank you for responding, now I know it works. I guess a few editors don't like me. Oh well.

Enjoy your summer. Bringingthewood (talk) 00:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm rooting for TJ to get there too. Don't sweat it if others dislike you as long as you're working in good faith and within policy. There's always going to be disagreements but just keep working at it. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:26, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Cool. If he stays healthy he'll do it. And yes, I agree, it is all in good faith. Reminds me of when I was with Answers.com, but I have to be much more patient, lol. I'll let you go. Thanks again! Bringingthewood (talk) 00:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:1662 in Croatia

A tag has been placed on Category:1662 in Croatia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 08:33, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

PROD/DePROD/RePROD? question regarding Huijuan

Hi! Hope this finds you well. I had removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} template from Huijuan when it was draftified per a question I asked on WT:PROD. I was told that the tag should be removed because it is a draft. I see that per WP:DRAFTIFY you have moved it back to article space as the draftification was out of process. Should the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag be restored to the page? I ask as if it were to not be the page essentially removed itself from being eligible for PROD/soft deletion via draftifying out of process, but would not normally be eligible as a page that has been DePROD'd is said to have a controversial deletion. TartarTorte 01:31, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey @TartarTorte. That's a situation I haven't come across until now, so that's a tough question and might be better suited for an admin. I supposed my interpretation would be that the deletion was contested in the form of of the original page creator moving the page to draft space to avoid deletion. Based on WP:DEPROD, there are very few situations where it's appropriate to re-add a PROD tag, even if the PROD tag was removed in bad faith. Based on that I'd say re-adding the PROD tag would not have been appropriate. Looks like it's at AfD now though. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:55, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Makes sense. It does seem like WP:PROD errs pretty heavily on the side of any removal of tags being a way of saying the deletion is not noncontroversial. Seems to be moot for this as it's at AfD as you noted, but thanks for the reply nonetheless. Cheers! TartarTorte 13:04, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
That's how I interpreted it as well. Have a good one! Hey man im josh (talk) 13:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft reviews

Could you review the drafts, The Flash (soundtrack), Cowboys & Aliens (soundtrack), My Week with Marilyn (soundtrack), Blue Valentine (soundtrack), Dawn of the Dead (soundtrack), Jack Reacher (soundtrack), White Men Can't Jump (2023 soundtrack), Star-Crossed: The Film 223.178.87.190 (talk) 12:22, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello IP user. I've noticed you've made some significant contributions, thank you for that by the way, and I wanted to encourage you to register an account. It would allow users to better communicate with you and for the good work you've done to be recognized as yours. It would also allow you to create articles directly in the article space, bypassing AfC in the process.
I'm sorry though, I don't take requests to review specific articles. Someone from the team will review them at their earliest convenience. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:27, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_David_Volk

Please see my comments on the Deletion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William David Volk discussion.

I also edited out the non sourced stuff.

Thanks. VideoGameVet (talk) 04:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

@VideoGameVet: It's not clear to me why you're reaching out about this. Please be aware that canvassing for support at a deletion discussion is against Wikipedia guidelines. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Sorry. you were in the deletion discussion and I was unaware of this rule. VideoGameVet (talk) 00:42, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
@VideoGameVet: At least now you're aware for the future. I now see that I did some deletion sorting and listed the discussion at a couple relevant venues. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:30, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Overcategorization

I've noicted that User:Meters has been removing the category:American male comedians if they are already in category:Jewish American male comedians.

I could be wrong as I've only just learned about overcategorization on Wikipedia but I think that might a bit excessive. Bob3458 (talk) 00:53, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, this has been explained to you multiple times, and an ANI thread has now been started (not by me). Meters (talk) 00:56, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Well I have autism and because of that I sometimes need things explained to me in a different way that I can understand better. So far I haven’t got that.
I didn’t realise until recently that I was overcategorization and I had no ill intentions so I just want to understand it better. Bob3458 (talk) 01:09, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
@Bob3458: I think you should read through WP:Overcategorization. Meters is correct in their removing of Category:American male comedians if the article is in Category:Jewish American male comedians.
Category:Jewish American male comedians is a part of Category:American male comedians, so having an article added to both categories adds the article to Category:American male comedians's category tree twice. If a subcategory exists and the article fits that subcategory, the article should be moved to the subcategory from the parent category, not added to both. Hey man im josh (talk) 02:38, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Ok thanks for the clarification Bob3458 (talk) 08:39, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Pioneer Courthouse Square

Greetings. FYI, the edits which you have been reverting look awfully familiar. Our old friend hadn't been seen in forever due to the indef-semi which had been on the article, but now that it's been lifted, the article merits closer attention. Recommend WP:RBI if they persist rather than continuing to engage. Thanks. --Finngall talk 19:05, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Finngall, thanks for making me aware of that LTA. I always say don't feed the trolls and I don't believe I engaged in this situation. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:21, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft move to main space

Hello, Hey man im josh,

Regarding Hartford High School, admins are much more quicker to take action if you use Twinkle to select CSD>G6 Move and add the name of the page that you want to move to main space. Providing a link is helpful but I think most admins would prefer to delete and do the move themselves. Thank you for all of your work on the project. Liz Read! Talk! 01:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip Liz. Looking at my logs I see that I tagged it as db-afc-move, which was appropriate. In my experience you are right though, G6 db-move does end up getting responded to more quickly. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:12, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
By the way, what do you think of all of these draft articles on a "MIMINO Song Contest" that you tagged for deletion earlier today? They've since been restored. But the only evidence I can find online for this international contest is an Instagram account. I warned the editor, who is devoted to creating these articles, that they won't get into main space if they can't prove that this elaborate, multi-year event actually exists. Maybe you are better at online sleuthing than I am but I imagined a production this big would be on the first page of Google search for MIMINO Song Contest. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 19:20, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Hey @Liz. I don't believe the competition is significant or notable. These appear to be Instagram based contests hosted by an account found here which has about 1,500 followers. From some quick research, it appears that Ashot Fahradian, the primary author of these articles, is actually the one who runs these contest (fandom wiki mentions this). The Instagram page also shares screenshots of and links to Draft:42nd MIMINO Song Contest. One of these contests has made it to main space in the past and the deletion discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/37th MIMINO Song Contest. After looking into this, it feels pretty clear that the contest is not notable and it's someone attempting to push their own product. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:11, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Gebrayelichthys

This is very easily missed, but Gebrayelichthys wasn't technically unsourced: Nursall & Capasso, 2004 in the infobox is a citation to the paper that first described it (an incomplete one, but still enough to locate it) and one or two of the taxon identifiers at the bottom link to reliable sources. Just something to look out for with taxon stubs. – Joe (talk) 15:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Joe Roe: Perhaps this is something I shouldn't do, but I typically haven't treated links in a a taxon identifier navbox as sources. Technically they do link to relevant information, but when an article hasn't been reviewed for several days and contains no in-line citations or general references I'm usually inclined to draftify until in-line or general references can be added. I now see what you're saying about the infobox so I'll try to pay more attention to that for taxon stubs moving forward. I'm thinking out loud here because I'm torn, but I don't think I'd have marked that as reviewed personally because there wasn't anything linked in the article, meaning anybody who wants to verify the information has to chase it down. On the other hand, because of the information you've provided, it's clear that it would likely survive at AfD, and that information would come up at AfD, meaning NPP should mark it as reviewed. I definitely have some conflicting feelings on this one and I think I'll have to chew on it for a few days, not because what you said doesn't make sense, it does, but because I may have to adjust the way I look what I think are "unrefereced" taxon stubs (which are luckily few and far between). Thank you for the feedback, luckily I don't think I've draftified many taxon stubs but I'll look over my draftify list when I get some free time to verify it. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:11, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Personally I'd at most put {{no footnotes}} on it. What we're talking about is really a matter of citation style, not sourcing. I.e. we'd all prefer that the Nursall & Capasso paper had a full reference with a link, in a footnote in the article body, but nevertheless it is there and sufficient to verify the article's content. Those of us that remember when Wikipedia's citation styles were all over the place, or when "chasing down" a source involved an afternoon in the library (which I'm just about old enough to), would see it as an inline citation and the taxon ID links as general references. So the issue becomes one of improving the article to meet de facto best practice (footnotes, cite templates, links) not the written minimum standard (Wikipedia:Citing sources just says cite them, as best you can). In my view NPP can only afford to concern itself with the latter. – Joe (talk) 04:25, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, in hindsight no footnotes is the appropriate tag, I just missed that point completely in the infobox. I do agree after thinking about it that marking it as reviewed is the right decision based on what you've said. I always ask myself "Will this survive at AfD?" and approve accordingly because, as you said, best practices aren't what we should generally be focused on (though that's great if reviewers want to implement best practices on those articles). Hey man im josh (talk) 12:43, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

David Gonzalez (artist)

Hi josh, sorry about that. I thought an article was automatically deleted when draftified so thanks for catching my mistake. That was mess! I accepted it then realized it already existed under a different title. S0091 (talk) 17:55, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey @S0091, nothing to be sorry about! Everything you were doing was in good faith and you found and corrected something. The only way to avoid the redirect being left behind after draftifying is to have the page mover role. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:45, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

La Di Da (Everglow song)

...is toast. Cheers =) slakr\ talk / 03:35, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much (not a) @Slakr! Hey man im josh (talk) 03:40, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).

Administrator changes

added Novem Linguae
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed MBisanz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Hey man im josh. Thank you for your work on 2023–24 New Orleans Pelicans season. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, I had the following comments:

Hello! I want to inform you that I have checked your article and mark it as reviewed. Have a good day and thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:06, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

List of Prussian agriculture ministers

Translated from German Wikipedia. --Pinoberlina (talk) 17:53, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

@Pinoberlina: We do not accept drafts without references, even if they are translated from another Wiki. Please expand the draft further and include reliable sources. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:55, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
that's a problem for Lists... and it is a translation from German Wikipedia. --Pinoberlina (talk) 17:57, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Lists still require references as the content must be verifiable. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:59, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
so i searched for refences and did as you told. --Pinoberlina (talk) 19:45, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for creating Category:Virginia geologic formation stubs and Category:Kentucky geologic formation stubs. See, I edited Template:Kentucky-geologic-formation-stub and Template:Virginia-geologic-formation-stub to have those categories. 158.106.52.10 (talk) 18:10, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

No problem at all, thanks for taking that of that with the templates. I just happened to find pages added to them without the categories being created, so I went ahead and created them. If you have any requests for categories you're welcome to submit them at WP:AFC/R. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:13, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Amanita arenicola

Hello Josh!! I saw that you reviewed my page. What does that mean? (I'm still fairly new to Wikipedia)

Please let me know if I'm putting this in the wrong place. Thank you! Aamanita (talk) 22:57, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Aamanita. I reviewed your page and, in short, I felt as though it was fit for Wikipedia so I marked it as "reviewed". Pages are typically considered "unreviewed" until a member of the New Page Patrol mark a page as reviewed or they may be autoreviewed if an editor has shown a history that indicates they don't need their articles to be manually reviewed. I think this link describes the purpose of New Page Patrol fairly well: Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol#Purpose Hey man im josh (talk) 23:04, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
Ah. Thank you! Aamanita (talk) 01:26, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

"Requesting Review for Draft: Juiceslf- Nigerian rapper, singer and songwriter"

Subject: Requesting Review for Draft:Juiceslf - Nigerian Rapper, Singer, and Songwriter

Hello Wikipedia New Page Reviewer,

I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to kindly request a review of a draft I have created titled "Juiceslf - Nigerian Rapper, Singer, and Songwriter." I believe this draft meets the notability criteria and provides valuable information about this talented artist in the Nigerian music industry.

The draft highlights Juiceslf's background, career, notable releases, and his impact on the music scene. It also includes references to reliable sources that support the information presented.

I have put significant effort into crafting this draft and adhering to Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. I believe Juiceslf's story deserves to be shared with the larger online community, contributing to the diversity of musical profiles on the platform.

I kindly request that you review the draft at your earliest convenience and provide any feedback or guidance for improvement. I look forward to your expert assessment and assistance in bringing this article to Wikipedia's readership.

Thank you for your time and consideration. If you require any further information or have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out.

Best regards, 

Jejeki (talk) 20:29, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
@Jejeki: Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. I'm sorry but I don't review submissions on request. If I accepted this request, this would be unfair to the other thousands of drafts awaiting our attention. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:55, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of List of National Football League annual receiving touchdowns leaders

Congratulations, Hey man im josh! The list you nominated, List of National Football League annual receiving touchdowns leaders, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Curling at the 2026 Winter Olympics

A tag has been placed on Category:Curling at the 2026 Winter Olympics indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 21:56, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Qualification for the 2026 Winter Olympics

A tag has been placed on Category:Qualification for the 2026 Winter Olympics indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 21:56, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey, Hey man im josh,
These categories contained an article that was moved to Draft space, rendering them temporarily empty. Liz Read! Talk! 21:57, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
No worries @Liz. I create a lot of categories based on what red ones that I find and am often looking over Special:WantedCategories, so this is just part of what happens sometimes. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:17, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

"Eritrea at the 2024 Summer Olympics" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Eritrea at the 2024 Summer Olympics has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 23 § Eritrea at the 2024 Summer Olympics until a consensus is reached. -- Tavix (talk) 22:10, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2026 in curling

A tag has been placed on Category:2026 in curling indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 03:09, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2026 Winter Olympics events

A tag has been placed on Category:2026 Winter Olympics events indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 03:11, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

College name change

Hi, re your message about removing content on List of university and college name changes in the United States, the school on the list that I removed has actually reverted back to the name listed as "former" on the page. I can edit again to remove the list entry and list the cancelled name change as the reason for editing if that would be acceptable. Or I can reverse it so the former name and the new one switch places. Can you advise on which is better? Battlecalm (talk) 19:46, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Battlecalm: I reverted your edit because you removed the entire M section of that list. I cannot advise which is better because I am not familiar with the list. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Ah ok. That was totally accidental. Thanks Battlecalm (talk) 19:55, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

House of Balloons / Glass Table Girls

You have made this edit but it appears that another editor restores it this edit. What do you think? TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 15:47, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey @TheAmazingPeanuts, thanks for letting me know. I personally still think that the song does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NSONG, so I may end up nominating it at AfD later on today. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:51, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

CONGRATS!

Congrats, my friend. That page looks much better now with a star on it! Bringingthewood (talk) 06:41, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @Bringingthewood! One of many NFL lists I have in my sights for promotion. Another nom going up later today :) Hey man im josh (talk) 10:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

You're very welcome. Wow, that answers that question, I wish you good luck with your future nom's, a pre-educated guess is that you'll do fine. All the best! Bringingthewood (talk) 22:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

ANI notice regarding User:Abdel hamid67

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 00:33, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Can I nominate myself?

As you might have noticed, I create a lot (>300) of redirects, and it's usually you who patrols them. Is it proper for me to nominate myself at WP:RAL? Theoretically it's apparently okay, but I don't see anyone nominating themselves there. 〜 Festucalex • talk 14:26, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Festucalex: Self nominations are ABSOLUTELY welcomed and encouraged! It's just that most people are not aware of this pseudoright so they haven't made the effort to apply. The reason you see that most nominations were made by me is because I'm the most active redirect patroller. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:28, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
@Hey man im josh: Thank you for your response (and your hard work)! 〜 Festucalex • talk 14:46, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Charles III requested move discussion

There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 07:22, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Draftifications

Hello, Hey man im josh,

Thank you for being so on-the-ball and noticing inappropriate draftifications and reverting them. I glance at the Move log throughout the day but I'm mainly keeping an eye out for article page moves done by new editors and I often don't look twice at moves done by experienced editors. But I can't assume that even editors who've been active for years are aware of the RFC guideline change about draftification so I'm glad that you are checking out page moves to Draft space that might be inappropriate. I've found that when an editor does a well-intentioned mistake repeatedly, often a personal note on their talk page can help bring their error to their attention so I appreciate that, too.

Thanks again for everything you do for the project...I hope we'll get a mop in your hand one day in the future, should you want to go through that process. My RFA experience was very unpleasant but lately it seems like a lot of candidates have sailed right through so you never know! Liz Read! Talk! 21:24, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Liz! I just happen to be lucky and stumble upon one, then found some others. I do plan on reaching out to users when it's an issue. Maybe some day I'll have a mop in hand, but for now I'm just working on being better and contributing. I very much appreciate your kind words and the effort that you put in. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in Afd

Hi Hey man im josh! I saw your contribution on NetReputation's page. I saw the page has been reviewed by you. Might you help and check relevant Afd discussion? There's here. Many thanks, gretuful to be part of community! Paranoya23 (talk) 12:10, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

@Paranoya23: I discourage you from asking others to participate in an AfD discussion, some may interpret it as WP:CANVASSING. As far as marking the page as reviewed, New Page Patrollers, such as myself, mark pages sent tp WP:AFD or WP:RFD as reviewed as a matter of procedure. When we do so we are not endorsing the content or giving it our seal of approval, we're simply removing it from the queue of pages that the team has to review. The reason being that the page is already undergoing a review at the relevant deletion discussion. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:16, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I sorry for WP:CANVASSING. It's just my 2nd page after Murder of Kateryna Handziuk and I just worried about the progress. It's frustrating. Paranoya23 (talk) 12:23, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
I understand. I won't be voting on the discussion but I wanted to just make you aware, as I do believe your efforts were in good faith. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

New unused templates

Hey there. It appears that you are creating a bunch of new navboxes, which is fine, but they are not being transcluded anywhere, which goes against template guidelines. They are polluting Wikipedia:Database reports/Unused templates (filtered)/1, a report that shows templates with no transclusions. Could you please refrain from creating more templates until the ones listed there are used, and ensure that any new templates that you create are transcluded somewhere? It makes the job of finding actual deleteable templates a little easier. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:23, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: Please remember to be patient and give users a reasonable amount of time to implement templates that they've created. There is a clear use for these templates that I've created and their implementation is being worked on. For my future reference, can you point towards any policy that refers to a time frame for which templates should be implemented? Hey man im josh (talk) 12:24, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Patience is what you are witnessing here; I have not nominated any of these unused templates for discussion. The guideline in question is WP:TG: Templates that ... become orphaned or used on only one page ... may be nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion. A good practice would be to create a template, transclude it in at least one article, and then create another template. The unused template report is generated every 24 hours, so if you use a template within a few hours of its creation, it is unlikely to appear in the report. I count 58 untranscluded hockey draft templates in the current report, which only has about 2,000 total entries in it. Most of those hockey draft templates have appeared in the report for four or five days. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:27, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@Jonesey95: Technically, none of these templates have become orphaned. The wording, to me, implies that a template has become unused instead of being created and not yet implemented.
Additionally, I'd like to point you towards point 3 of WP:TFD#REASONS: The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution (the latter cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks), and has no likelihood of being used
There is a clear usage case in this situation and this is a work in progress. I'm not finding anything that states there is a deadline for which a template must be implemented. You're welcome to send these to TfD, but I don't believe that's a productive use of anybody's time. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:42, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:2024 Indian Premier League

Template:2024 Indian Premier League has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 66 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 66 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 73 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 73 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 81 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 81 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 90 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 90 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 100 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 100 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's +100 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's +100 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's team" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's team has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 48 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 48 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 52 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 52 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 57 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 57 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 63 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 63 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 70 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 70 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 78 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's 78 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's +78 kg" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's +78 kg has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

"Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's team" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Women's team has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 30 § Judo at the 2021 Summer World University Games – Men's 60 kg until a consensus is reached. CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC) CLalgo (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Reviewing My NPP Articles

Hi there @Hey man im josh,

I wanted to make a request since you're a new page reviewer. Since I shouldn't be doing this myself, can you take a look at my articles in NPP and mark them reviewed when appropriate? If so, here's a list of my current ones there:

1. Anikv 2. Blago White 3. Gayazovs Brothers 4. Artik (singer) 5. Big Baby Tape 6. Little Big videography 7. Sonya Tayurskaya 8. 1990 (Max Barskih album) 9. 5sta Family 10. Universal Music Russia

A note on Big Baby Tape: I didn't know that the article was deleted before, but I asked for it to be brought back as a draft to address problems raised. It should be better now. Also, all of these articles are translations from the Russian Wikipedia.

If you can review them and get them out of the queue, great! If not, it's completely fine. Thanks again for your help.

P.S: If you also look at drafts and are willing to review them too, I can give a list of the ones I have at AfC. Losipov (talk) 23:11, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Losipov: I'm sorry, but I don't typically review submissions on request. I did quickly browse those pages though and realized that I don't have enough familiarity in that subject area (Russian music) to be able to properly evaluate those articles. One suggestion I do have though is to consider improving the sources on those articles, as I noticed that a number of the references in the various articles were not from what's considered reliable sources. I recommend checking out Novem's script at User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter to aid with this. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Would you re-check my Arleen McCarty Hynes page?

You already did check the page, but then another user put a deletion notice on it. I'm surprised and confused. You said to a previous user that you don't review on request, so I'm not expecting anything, but I'm only asking because you did review it once. If you don't do that, it's okay, I can figure another way out of this puzzlement. Fortunaa (talk) 01:48, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

@Fortunaa: New page patrollers, such as myself, mark pages sent to WP:AFD or WP:RFD as reviewed as a matter of procedure. When we do so we are not endorsing the content or giving it our seal of approval, we're simply removing it from the queue of pages that the team has to review. The reason being that the page is already undergoing a review at the relevant deletion discussion. Hey man im josh (talk) 02:32, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Makes sense, thank you. Fortunaa (talk) 02:34, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

2023 Super Cups in Water Polo

When there's a article/source for this event, I will put it in the article. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 14:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

@ILoveSport2006: You removed the tags I added to 2023 LEN Super Cup here and the tag I added to 2023 Women's LEN Super Cup here. These tags are meant to indicate the articles contain no references. If an article cannot currently be referenced then it belongs in draft space. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:48, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I put articles in now. Can you make it an article again? ILoveSport2006 (talk) 15:45, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@ILoveSport2006: I wasn't sure what you meant but I looked at your edit history. It looks like you're referring to Draft:2023 Women's LEN Super Cup. You're welcome to submit the draft or move the page yourself. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:46, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you ILoveSport2006 (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
In the future though, please leave the {{unreferenced}} template in place until the article actually has references including. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:50, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Simpson Kalisher

On 28 July 2023, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Simpson Kalisher, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Schwede66 16:20, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Redirects

Please do not create redirects for MSE sport event related articles. They are not useful and serve no purpose. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:10, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

@Sportsfan 1234: I disagree, but I do encourage you to send said redirects to RFD to establish consensus on the matter if you think Wikipedia would be better without those redirects. Hey man im josh (talk) 03:54, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
I think redirects are fine after the event has finished. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:58, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey man im luvving questions

would you like, know what happened to the towers of The Sharp Centum Park 203 and The Sharp Centum Park 109? Coz i really wanna know, yah naw i mean? and stuff like that. peace. Jaiquiero (talk) 14:44, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

@Jaiquiero: I do not know what happened to those towers. But as discussed on your talk page, please do not create redirects for items that are not mentioned in the list. I understand they follow the naming scheme of some of the towers mentioned in the lists, but redirects for towers not mentioned in the list are not good redirect and should not be created. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:48, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

What improvements can be made in Punjab University Law College page?

I created a pade naed "Punjab University Law College" and added the alumni section. Should I add more information to prevent it from deletion? Dawood Ch 471 (talk) 02:27, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Desert kurrajong

Thanks mate! 220.235.72.47 (talk) 03:56, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2023 in Monaco motorsport

A tag has been placed on Category:2023 in Monaco motorsport indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:09, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Ahhh, another red cat I made while patrolling which is now empty. Oh well. Hey man im josh (talk) 01:11, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Autopatrolled

Many thanks for the nomination Pyeongchang (talk) 10:55, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

@Pyeongchang: Many thanks for your contributions, in both quality and quantity. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:23, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
Now that I've gotten off your shoulders and got RAL-approved, here's a barnstar for painstakingly patrolling >100 redirects I created. 〜 Festucalex • talk 22:38, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
@Festucalex: Thank you so much for the barnstar AND for putting in the work of creating all of those! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:22, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Smiley You're welcome! 〜 Festucalex • talk 15:33, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Hey man im josh. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:14, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

@BeanieFan11: I've gotten back to you. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:20, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Hey man im josh. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

In case you didn't see my message from last night. Thank you! Liz Read! Talk! 15:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Liz, I did see your message and actually responded to it. You didn't receive an on-wiki notification though since I replied directly. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:55, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Saints1984DraftPicks

Template:Saints1984DraftPicks has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:31, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).

Administrator changes

added Firefangledfeathers
removed

Interface administrator changes

added Novem Linguae

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Notability requirements

Who decides what is notable and what isn't? It's utter nonsense. Every sports tournament or any subject on Wikipedia could be notable enough to be an article. Don't go on any of my articles and say that it's not notable enough, because it is completely subjective. Personally, I will be watching many games of the 2023–24 LEN Challenger Cup, so I think it fully exceeds Notability requirements. It's called the Free Encyclopedia for a reason. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 14:15, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@ILoveSport2006: I believe you should read over Wikipedia:Notability. Just because something exists does not necessarily mean it should exist on Wikipedia. Additionally, I highly encourage you to read WP:OWN, as no articles are "yours". Hey man im josh (talk) 14:19, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
European club competitions in each season should be an article. Why do you think your opinion is more important than others when it comes to what is notable. The articles that I created or have edited could have problems, but to say that essentially it shouldn't exist is not just subjective, but nonsense. How would you like it if I went on an article you made or edited and said I don't care about this, so this article shouldn't exist. I will not be replying to you again about this subject because you have no facts to back your point and all your arguments you made are fully subjective, not factual. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 14:32, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
@ILoveSport2006: First off, tone the hostility back, it's entirely unnecessary. "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for sports and athletics. -- the tag I placed states that there is a chance that the article may not meet notability guidelines. I have not placed a scathing indictment on the article or said "this is a piece of garbage that shouldn't exist". It's a tag meant to indicate that this article could use some improvement to better signal that the subject of the article is notable. I have not nominated the article for deletion, I placed this tag on an article with a single reference from a primary source (the tournament's host). I added a tag because the article contains very poor sourcing, is two sentences long, refers to a third tier of a sports league (which may indicate questionable notability), and is the second season of a new league. That's perfectly reasonable and you're welcome to remove the questionable notability tag. What you're not welcome to do is attack editors.
How would you like it if I went on an article you made or edited and said I don't care about this, so this article shouldn't exist. -- That is entirely your right, and I respect your right to do so in a civil manner. If you believe any of the articles or redirects I've created should not exist on Wikipedia, then please nominate them for deletion at WP:AFD or WP:RFD.
Why do you think your opinion is more important than anybody else's? You yourself acknowledge that the articles you've created have issues, and I am adding the appropriate tags to point out said issues so that they may addressed. I'd again like to encourage you to read over WP:Notability and WP:Civil before attacking other editors. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:44, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
On the my opinion is more important argument, I am not the one putting notability tags on other people's articles. If I come across as hostile, it's because I think that notability tag was really hurtful. From someone who likes so many sports tournaments, and thinks they're boring to everyone else, I get hurt by comments like that because it brings back my insecurities. I am not like other people on Wikipedia, I will make these articles and finish them and make them really good. I did the 2022–23 LEN Challenger Cup article from scratch and I'm really proud of it. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 15:01, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
@ILoveSport2006: "on other people's articles" – They belong to nobody, tags should be placed whenever and wherever appropriate. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, which means you need to conduct yourself appropriately and communicate with others in a civil manner. You are responsible for your own actions. I'd like to re-iterate that I have no nominated any of the articles you created for deletion. If you want to avoid your articles being nominated by editors then you should expand them to include additional sources. As it stands, most of the articles you've written contain either no citations or contain mostly references that are from the tournament host's website (primary sources). I encourage you to look at WP:SPORTBASIC and to add secondary sources to the pages you've created before moving on to create more pages. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:08, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
While I am thankful none of my articles have been deleted, you seriously can't give me a bit of sympathy after I told you about my insecurities. I tried to show you why I reacted like that and that's all you give me back.
I'm tired of speaking about this so I'm going to end with a few points I want to share.
  • Don't say I am attacking editors because every other editor has been nice to me outside of you.
  • Saying that anyone can nominate anyone's articles for deletion is not just sad but could create a toxic atmosphere
  • I love editing on Wikipedia, so threatening an autistic kid by saying their editing options could be restricted is really bad (you said that on my talk page, not here).
  • Unlike what you say, 99% of things that exist in the world could (and should) be an article if possible.
  • Finally, this quote is on your home page I may not like the criticism you have to offer, but I'll listen to it to try to improve and do better. I hope you never put a notability tag on anyone's article because it's completely subjective.
I am working on the articles and editing them almost every day, you can say they are not my articles, but when I am the only one that edits them, it's difficult not to think that.
From now on, just leave me alone to do my own editing and creating. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 17:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
@ILoveSport2006: I've informed you of things in a neutral and respectful way so I'm sorry if you choose to take them a different way. To respond to your various points:
  • Don't say I am attacking editors because every other editor has been nice to me outside of you. -- I have not been rude to you, I have responded calmly despite your unnecessary incivility.
  • Saying that anyone can nominate anyone's articles for deletion is not just sad but could create a toxic atmosphere -- Sorry, but this is how Wikipedia works. Anybody, at any time, can nominate an article for deletion if they believe the article is not fit for Wikipedia, but they should obviously only do do based on relevant grounds. See WP:DELETION.
  • I love editing on Wikipedia, so threatening an autistic kid by saying their editing options could be restricted is really bad (you said that on my talk page, not here). -- No one has threatened you. You received a standard boiler plate message that your removal of the relevant tags from articles was disruptive. As discussed, leave tags such as Template:One source when the article only contains sourcing from a single source.
  • Unlike what you say, 99% of things that exist in the world could (and should) be an article if possible. -- I do not make the policies and I'm sorry if you don't agree with Wikipedia's WP:Notability guidelines.
  • Finally, this quote is on your home page ... I hope you never put a notability tag on anyone's article because it's completely subjective. -- I've explained the purpose of the tag, my rationale for applying the tag, and how the application of the tag was appropriate in context. You have not offered any constructive criticism, you've simply stated "I don't like it" and have told me to stop. I will continue to apply the tag when an article has questionable notability.
Lastly, I will re-iterate that no one owns articles on Wikipedia, despite how you may feel. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:50, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

2011 NFL Draft, notable undrafted free agents section

Hey Josh!, I hope you're having a nice time.

I'm writing to you because I know that you are a great Wikipedia contributor and I want to ask you if you can help me and protect the 2011 NFL Draft page, because there's an user adding undrafted players that are not notable, for example:

Is that notable? I think it is not. So I hope you can help

Regards =) Sergio Skol (talk) 00:37, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Sure @Sergio Skol, I'll keep an eye out. Hey man im josh (talk) 02:34, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll wait for it.
I was on a edit war against him, but I decided to forget that for now, until the page is protected.
Another example, he wants to add Richard Medlin, a player with literally no official stats =/ Sergio Skol (talk) 02:51, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
If they have an article, that is usually enough to include them unless there is consensus to be more strict with that list. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:06, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
@QuicoleJR: Could you please point to where this kind of consensus was established? The list is not all inclusive, similar to the free agent signings section. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:08, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
Actually, this discussion should be had at Talk:2011_NFL_Draft#Notable_undrafted_players. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:09, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who believe that a hot dog is a sandwich has been nominated for discussion

Category:Wikipedians who believe that a hot dog is a sandwich has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. * Pppery * it has begun... 13:07, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Request on 13:20:54, 11 August 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Akhibhasan55


Akhibhasan55 (talk) 13:20, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Teamwork Barnstar
Can't believe you got to send one of these first 🙄. Thanks for all your help on List of National Football League annual passing touchdowns leaders :) ULPS (talk) 17:01, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
It was a pleasure working with you @ULPS! Hey man im josh (talk) 17:01, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for signing my guestbook!

Notrealname1234 (talk) 21:40, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the wonderfully cute kitten! Hey man im josh (talk) 21:42, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the confidence in my editing to nominate me for redirect autopatrolled (Special:Diff/1169536359). I've definitely noticed, and appreciate your work, at patrolling the redirects I've created. Skynxnex (talk) 17:32, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Skynxnex. Thank YOU for the work you put that caught my attention! I appreciate your contributions and I think that, if you're ever interested, you should consider joining the NPP team. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:34, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
I've pondered apply for NPP, partly since it seems that the backlog is growing. I'm one of the people who are a bit eh about the concept of draft space as it current exists on English Wikipedia but I assume I'd still be seen as helpful if I focus more on redirects and whatever unpatrolled pages I'm confident with? Skynxnex (talk) 23:05, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
@Skynxnex: It's okay if you're not the biggest fan of draft space, you don't HAVE to draftify pages. You could always tag and move on, skip the page(s), or send it to AfD. You would absolutely still be helping out by focusing on redirects and those pages that you're confident in. Redirects and my niche (American football) were exactly how I started at NPP and if that's what you want to do, well, we'd LOVE to have you! Every bit helps and there's no obligation to do any more than you feel up to on any given day. Hey man im josh (talk) 23:59, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Come give it a shot @Skynxnex, I really do think you'd do well at it. I hope to see an application from you at WP:PERM/NPR (no pressure though). Hey man im josh (talk) 00:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of List of National Football League annual passing touchdowns leaders

Congratulations, Hey man im josh! The list you nominated, List of National Football League annual passing touchdowns leaders, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best lists on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured list. Keep up the great work! Cheers, PresN (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:25, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

ANOTHER CONGRATS!!

This is what you get when I stumble upon things. You did say that you were putting another one up. I was on that page tonight, saw the star, did some detective work and here I am. Not sure if this was put up for nomination publicly, I never saw it on my watchlist like the July article. Regards, John Bringingthewood (talk) 04:27, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

@Bringingthewood: Thank you! That makes the fifth NFL annual statistical leader article to make it to FL (that was only the third one I worked on). Rushing TDs, interceptions, and sacks are all almost ready and I should have another one nominated by Monday. I also have passing yards leader currently at FLC, so that should be the sixth / my fourth! Hey man im josh (talk) 07:56, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

You're very welcome, that is fantastic! At the risk of repeating myself, YOU DESERVE IT!! And your partner in crime is deserving as well. I will say hello.

You know what? CONGRATS 3x .. 4x ... ah hell, 10x ....... you're the man for all that is upcoming! I'll see you the next time, one way or the other. Stay well. Bringingthewood (talk) 21:01, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Well thank you @Bringingthewood, I always appreciate your kind words! Hey man im josh (talk) 14:12, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

You're very welcome, and not only do I appreciate all that YOU do ... I have to echo all that I'm now reading below.

That would be a very good day!  ; )

See you later. Bringingthewood (talk) 21:37, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

AAFC

FWIW, it's mentioned in the 1st paragraph at List of National Football League annual receiving yards leaders. I don't care one way or another, other than the lead mention should go if we're not listing the stats. Just to be devil's advocate, we're not a slave to what the NFL recognizes either. Given it was approved with that content as an FL, perhaps discuss at WT:NFL...or just WP:BB some more. Best. —Bagumba (talk) 13:25, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Bagumba: I think I'm going to be bold a bit more and remove it from the lead. If anybody wishes to contest its removal I won't have an issue with it, but I'm trying to make the annual articles a bit more consistent and most of the others do not mention the AAFC. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:27, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Sounds good. Is the AAFC stats worth WP:PRESERVE as it own standalone list? I know nothing about the league myself.—Bagumba (talk) 13:30, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
I wonder if it would be better to have an AAFC article that combines all of the statistical leaders instead of having small standalone AAFC articles. I'm going to give it and some thought and maybe start a discussion at WT:NFL in a day or so. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:32, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Only four seasons LOL. I shoulda looked at the content more and not just your edit summary. —Bagumba (talk) 14:31, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Haha, it's easy to forget that the AAFC was such a short-lived league! Hey man im josh (talk) 14:32, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for reviewing my redirect page! Myrealnamm (talk) 18:24, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Don't worry..

To Err is human, to admit it humbly divine. With apologies if you do not subscribe to deist valuesShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:59, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Requesting reviews for two articles

Jón Laxdal (actor), the original German version has too many spurious sources, so I tried my best to use reputable news articles.

Jón Laxdal (composer), I tried my best to find sources despite the limited presence on the internet. He was noticeable in Icelandic music history.

Thank you in advance for reviewing. Komitsuki (talk) 04:25, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

@Komitsuki: I'm sorry, but I don't review specific articles on review. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:00, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
So, how long does it take for an article to be reviewed these days? Komitsuki (talk) 07:27, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

There is a mop reserved in your name

You are a remarkable editor in many ways. You would be a good administrator, in my opinion, and appear to be well qualified. You personify an administrator without tools and have gained my support already!

To be honest, you're one of those editors that I see with a mop and bucket in the near future. — Prodraxis {talk • contribs} (she/her) 13:42, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the kind words @Prodraxis. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:07, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
You're welcome. But seriously with all this track record in New Pages Patrol, CSD, and antivandalism combined with the great content work (3 FLs!) you definitely meet my admin criteria. — Prodraxis {talk • contribs} (she/her) 14:12, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Hang on, Josh isn't an admin already? News to me. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 21:10, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
IKR? - UtherSRG (talk) 11:05, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Took a quick look and your NPP work is solid, especially given all the RFPP and UAA reports it leads to. Thanks for the work you do, and I hope you consider requesting more tools. — Wug·a·po·des 21:14, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
+1 ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:26, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
One of the most helpful mentors I've had so far at NPP, I'm sure you would do great with the tools. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 21:36, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Would support at RfA — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 06:06, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Indeed! - UtherSRG (talk) 11:05, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Another admin at NPP is always helpful. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 11:39, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Totally agree - I've always thought you'd make an excellent admin Josh :) BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:15, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you all for the words of encouragement, I really do appreciate it. Maybe some day! Hey man im josh (talk) 12:08, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Give it some thought Josh. I would certainly support, and even if you do not go for it, I would recommend you at least stepping up as a Lead coordinator. I think Novem Linguae would appreciate an extra set of hands :) The Night Watch (talk) 14:47, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you @The Night Watch, but there's actually a much more deserving person I've suggested in case Novem ever wanted a co-lead coordinator. He also already knows my hands are his to help out with whatever he may need. :) Hey man im josh (talk) 14:50, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
I’m once again really late to the party for these things, but from our chats on discord, you know you’ll definitely have my support. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 02:51, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Source

I tried to there a youtube video where they announce the game and talk about the features I mentioned and I linked both but it wouldn't let me do the edit cos it's black listed but it's from there page and the creator talkong. Search Broken Sword New Game Chat with Charles Cecil at Gamescom (Parzival's Stone & Reforged) for story mode info and Broken sword reforged on YouTube and it's there. 31.185.181.213 (talk) 17:14, 31 August 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.185.181.213 (talk)

It's legit lol. https://twitter.com/Cressup/status/1695815934576038260?t=g--Kkj2yuPlJSYF1cOisAQ&s=19
https://twitter.com/RevSoftGames/status/1694364865220018673?t=g--Kkj2yuPlJSYF1cOisAQ&s=19 31.185.181.213 (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
It's from. The company and creator how legit do you need? I'm trying my best here. 31.185.181.213 (talk) 17:35, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
As mentioned, we ideally need to find a source that's not Twitter or YouTube. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:36, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
This isn't 2002 people don't put stuff on blogs! They only use twitter
https://www.ign.com/articles/brand-new-broken-sword-game-announced-alongside-remaster-of-first-game-gamescom-2023
Yhis then? 31.185.181.213 (talk) 17:38, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Twitter, YouTube, and usually blogs are not considered reliable sources. I'm sorry but we it's just not proper to cite paragraphs to tweets. Your IGN source however is considered reliable and can be used (WP:IGN). Hey man im josh (talk) 17:41, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! The game is legit I wasn't lying or vandalism and the actual creator talks about story mode. 31.185.181.213 (talk) 17:42, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Just so we're clear, it's not that I didn't believe the information from the Twitter and YouTube links, it's that they are not appropriate sources. If information cannot be sourced from appropriate places then it does not belong in an article. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

All-America Football Conference (AAFC) stats

Hi man!, how are you?

Going through some NFL stats leaders pages (Like NFL passing yards leaders), I noticed that you removed the AAFC's from some of them. You have a point in saying that the NFL does not consider these statistics official, but I think that they should be added because it was an important league for the development of the NFL. I think that you already know that the Browns and the 49ers played in the AAFC, as well as great players like Otto Graham and Lou Groza.

Another reason why I think they should show up is because sacks before 1982 do show up, these sack are not official either but they and the AAFC stats are supported by PFR.

I think that, as with the sacks, they should be added but making it clear to the reader that they are not official statistics.

PS. If you agree, do not worry about adding it again by yourself, I can help you or even do it by my own, love do it =) Sergio Skol (talk) 20:48, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Sergio Skol. I've been thinking about this since it was brought up by Bagumba. How would you feel about a page that covers all of the annual leaders for the AAFC? Given the length of the league (4 seasons) I don't think it makes a ton of sense to have them as standalone articles, but I also think they may not necessarily belong on the NFL annual leader lists. I think this could be a good compromise and I think it could present all the relevant information in a single place for those who are looking to find out more about the AAFC. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:58, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
@Sergio Skol: The more I've thought about this the more I like the idea. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
I like the idea, the important thing is that this info is on Wikipedia, either as part of the NFL pages or as main articles. I personally like to do it.
Just I do not know if I would make an individual article for each of the stats, or only create one titled "List of All-America Football Conference stats leaders" or something like that, and group all the important statistics there, because as you mentioned, it only lasted four seasons; so I think a single individual page would be better. (But I support any ideas to add them) Sergio Skol (talk) 23:20, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
@Sergio Skol: Exactly. I'll try to give it a go at some point this week unless you want to get on it first. Hey man im josh (talk) 23:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
If I collect all the References first, I'll do it, perhaps by tomorrow or the next day, do not worry about it.
And I'll edit every single player to add it to their infoboxes, BTW =) Sergio Skol (talk) 23:33, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
@Sergio Skol: List of AAFC statistics as the title? Hey man im josh (talk) 23:36, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
@Sergio Skol: I actually just realized something. Check out All-America_Football_Conference#AAFC_Leaders. Hey man im josh (talk) 23:37, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
I like creating the new page even more because some stats are missing, like completion percentage, passer rating, special teams stats (personality I love the ST); that section seems like a draft to me Sergio Skol (talk) 23:47, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
The page is created now!, it's the next: List of AAFC annual statistics leaders.
I'mma add some additional references, but I thought it was alright to be released. Sergio Skol (talk) 19:16, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
That's awesome, thank you @Sergio Skol! Hey man im josh (talk) 19:17, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Please review

Hi Josh! Could you please review my recently created articles, Shri Biren and Yairipok Thambalnu? I created it with a great passion. So, I couldn't wait for a long time keeping it unreviewed by anyone. :-) Haoreima (talk) 13:12, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Haoreima. I'm sorry, but I don't review articles upon request, otherwise I feel as though I'd be flooded with requests. Thank you for your contributions though! A member of the NPP team will take a look at their earliest convenience. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:13, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Oh sorry! It's ok. Haoreima (talk) 13:14, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
No worries! It's a perfectly reasonable request and I don't expect people to know my policy on such requests :) Hey man im josh (talk) 13:15, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Half Barnstar
For excellence in cooperation, particularly your kind help with the FL nomination of List of awards and honours received by Angela Merkel, and general availability to answer my questions about NPP and WP in general. Thank you! Actualcpscm scrutinize, talk 14:21, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you @Actualcpscm! It was a pleasure working with you :) Hey man im josh (talk) 14:53, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Sean Stegall

I see you tagged Sean Stegall. I'm wondering if I should PROD it. There are informational sources about this fellow, like like this, but still, it's a source. Most other sources are primary. What do you think? Magnolia677 (talk) 19:09, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Magnolia677. In my experience, it's not usually productive to PROD new articles, though you're welcome to give it a shot in the future. The assumption is that someone who has just created the article would most likely contest its deletion while PROD is meant to be used when you do not expect resistance to the article's deletion. However, I did notice that the article's creator has a COI so I've moved the article to draft space as, per WP:COIEDIT, those with a COI should go through WP:AFC to submit new articles. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:02, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Great. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:37, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Review request

Hey Josh, I just saw you marked a page as reviewed on my watchlist, so I thought I'd ask if you could have a quick look at Adam Tactical Group. The reviewer handling it requested more categories, which was then added but I think they forgot to mark it. I'd appreciate if you could have a look and mark it or let me know if there's any issues, thanks! TylerBurden (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @TylerBurden. I'm sorry, but I don't review articles upon request. If I did so, I expect that I'd be getting quite a few requests regularly, and I don't want to encourage those types of requests here. Rest assured, a member of the NPP team will take a look at their earliest convenience. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:50, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Understandable, no problem. Thanks anyway. TylerBurden (talk) 18:52, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Surreal Barnstar
I think this is a type of shiny thing you haven't gotten yet, well deserved! And do check yourself out for Wikiholicism! Fork99 (talk) 10:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
@Fork99 thank you!! I'm a card carrying member of Wikiholics anonymous :P Hey man im josh (talk) 10:19, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

DYK for List of awards and honours received by Angela Merkel

On 31 August 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article List of awards and honours received by Angela Merkel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Forbes named German chancellor Angela Merkel the world's most powerful woman fourteen times? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/List of awards and honours received by Angela Merkel. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, List of awards and honours received by Angela Merkel), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Z1720 (talk) 00:02, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Precious

lists

Thank you for quality lists such as List of awards and honours received by Angela Merkel and List of National Football League annual receiving touchdowns leaders, with more in the making, for fighting vandalism, for collaboration, for "It isn't perfect. Yet." - Josh, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2875 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:15, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much @Gerda Arendt! I was hoping to get one of these some day =D Hey man im josh (talk) 19:21, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

A question

Hello, my friend!

I'm a bit confused, which is no shock, but when it comes to free agents .. what's the deal? I see there's a 'status' line and a 'current team' line when editing. Tonight I removed 'Free agent' from status, this way it doesn't show on the page when viewing. But I did notice Malcolm Butler, and he has it listed by current team (behind the scenes look).

Bottom line .. the words 'Free agent', are they to be listed anywhere? On any line when editing the infobox? Thanks, John Bringingthewood (talk) 02:49, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

P.S. You know when I start removing things, I'll need a backup plan.  :)

I deleted my last update (limiting my mess here), it was regarding a former player and there would be no free agent present at all. Bringingthewood (talk) 07:46, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @John, I'm so sorry! I meant to respond to this yesterday but completely forgot to do so. Free agent is not meant to be under the current_team or status parameters, as the parameters should be left blank when a player is a free agent, per Template:Infobox_NFL_biography#Parameters_and_instructions. As for the lead, there was a consensus to include "free agent" in the lead for up to 2 years after the player most recently had a try out. Additionally, regarding the lead, there was consensus that "currently a free agent" is unnecessary and the lead should instead just say "is a free agent".
I actually was removing "free agent" from the current_team parameter about a month or so ago, but I didn't end up finishing. I got all the way up to Jalen Reagor, with another 15,747 pages to be checked in the queue. If you use [[WP:AWB] I could help you out with the proper settings to go through and clean up the parameter? Hey man im josh (talk) 12:16, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Funny, if I only can get myself to upgrade my horse and buggy. I lost the preview button before submitting an edit. That hurts.

Back to business. No apology ever needed. I would give you until at least Thanksgiving to reply, I'm the one that kept editing your talk page. Ahhhh, thank you for that. I did see you removing some, but I forgot the exact line for removal. Great, from now on ... gone. Also, I have been knocking off the 'currently' word from the lead. Some editors may be a bit slow on grasping it.

Honestly, I appreciate all the help you've given, but if you don't see me screwing up all that's holy, I'll continue doing what I'm doing. I remove stat parameters when it states former and 0 stats in some sections etc. I thank you again in advance, but if you give me too much rope I'll hang myself, and maybe some good people along with me, lol. Bringingthewood (talk) 02:40, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
  • A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

Miscellaneous

  • Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hey_man_im_josh/Archive_10&oldid=1175019688"