This is an archive of past discussions with User:Annh07. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello Annh07/Archives/2024,
New Page Review queue January to March 2024
Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.
Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.
Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.
It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!
2023 Awards
Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!
Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.
Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.
Hi, please read the description: The following table lists the last ten posts that were once the most-liked post on Instagram, with the number of likes as they were when the top spot was reached. The post you want to add is not a record, because to break the record, this post must surpass the current record of 75.4 million likes. Annh07 (talk) 10:16, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
The update on Andri Eleftheriou 's Wikipedia is more than reliable considering that all the update done by Shooter848484 is on display publicly.
Please have a check on Google and ISSF page to confirm the details 's authenticity before removing the contents.
Always nice though to see everyone is alert ☺️ Didilina09 (talk) 13:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
We always want new editors here on Wikipedia, but the encyclopaedia is not a place to promote yourself or your project. If you there is enough independent coverage about what you're doing, it might indeed be appropriate for there to be an article about you, but it would need to be written neutrally rather than promotionally, not include external links to your work, and be written by someone with no connection to you. That last point is crucial; no one should be making an article about themselves. Please read WP:COI. Thank you. Annh07 (talk) 17:27, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
third of all, the Spanish Wikipedia was just providing footnotes (I don't know a lot of footnotes because I don't use them) so I didn't place them in the article.
Last of all, i'm not trying to start a edit war, or a discussion, just wanted you to know this points, have a good day.
Hi @W!kipedista. Yes, I reverted your edits in the José Raúl Mulino article because it was completely unsourced.
Some bold edits are required by Wikipedia policies for example unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion (see WP:BLPSOURCE). With some bold edits the reversal of the edit can only be made if the version reverted to includes a citation from a reliable source (see WP:PROVEIT).
I tried to update the Sky-Watch page to reflect current management team and products. It seems you reverted it. I am not sure why, the information currently published is not correct. Please let me know what I can do to make sure the information provide reflects what the correct company information Tje-sky-watch (talk) 18:07, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Tje-sky-watch. Get this straight, because you have a conflict of interest with Sky-Watch, you should not directly edit articles about this organization (see WP:COI), all edits must be through the article's talk page, please use this template: Edit COI. Thank you. Annh07 (talk) 18:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
@Mosa2121. What do you want to discuss? If you want to add content to the article again, please provide a reliable source. In addition, you should not copy text from elsewhere (most sources are copyrighted materials). Please review the policies and guidelines on your talk page. If you need help, please post a question at Tea house. Annh07 (talk) 19:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. They made too many worthless edits, causing the history of the article to become unnecessarily bloated. Annh07 (talk) 18:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Maurice Magnus. That link was posted by an editor with a conflict of interest: ExhibitionOnScreen – they based their username on Exhibition On Screen (see the about page on their website). They spammed their site in many articles. You should also visit their talk page to see the discussions. Thank you. Annh07 (talk) 12:20, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Of course you can restore the content because you have no conflict of interest. However, if you can find a better and more independent source, you should replace it. Annh07 (talk) 12:49, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
I restored it and added a link to an independent source, namely a review in The Guardian. But I see no reason to delete the official source. Of course, it promotes the film, but it also contains information about it. Maurice Magnus (talk) 14:53, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
thetruthlies website
Hello,
I had recently added a website as a reference to the Black ops 6 Wikipedia page under marketing and you seemed to revert the page giving the reason "not needed". I apologize if I find it unclear as to the reason why you reverted as I am new to Wikipedia editing. But I think the website could be needed if people would like to preview the marketing material used. I do understand that the website could possibly be a temporary website. TheOminousBlade (talk) 19:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi @TheOminousBlade. Your edit is not adding a reference, you are actually just providing an external link to a website as a reference. The purpose of references is to help readers verify the content in the article – what is stated in the article must be cited from reliable published sources (see Wikipedia:Verifiability). When adding references, you must provide a specific link to the page containing the source material, not just a link to its home page, which is not helpful to the reader because they need to verify information, not learning about that website. I encourage you to read Help:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia:Citing sources. Happy editing! Annh07 (talk) 21:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
