This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ritchie333. 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.
It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.
John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.
NPP Technical Achievement Award
As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.
Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here
18:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Advice on how to deal with a SPA
Hello Ritchie,
If you have the time I would appreciate some advice. I am not sure on how to best deal with the SPAOdinNeith. It added a legal matters section on the article of a company: (Vineyard_Vines#Legal_Matters). I removed it as undue because in my opinion it violated WP:BLPCRIME for the first part and WP:NOTNEWS for the rest, as it was referenced by routine coverage. I asked the editor to follow WP:BRD and discuss in talk before adding the disputed content back. I tried both with edit summaries and in the user's talk page. You can see the response here: User_talk:OdinNeith. I did not know how best to proceed, as it was not just a matter for dispute resolution, and after three failed attempts I simply gave up. Recently a user with a declared COI representing the company has pinged me, first on their talk page and now on the page of the article (Talk:Vineyard_Vines#Revenue_Milestone). I answered to this last message that I would seek advice from someone with more experience. You gave me good advice in the past and I trust your judgment. If you are too busy to get into it just let me know. Regards. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 18:19, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
I am currently reviewing this article. Could you please help me review better? This is my first time reviewing an article to GA status. NASCARfan0548↗04:06, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
NASCARfan0548, I've had trouble getting time to do anything on here recently; however I agree with the other comments that you need to go into some depth. While the article is in reasonably good shape and I know that MWright96 has a good track record of quality content, that doesn't mean the article's beyond criticism, and indeed I would expect most diligent writers to agree with that. For example, Immediately in the opening sentence I can see "and former Formula One (F1) racer who won the 2009 F1 World Championship" .... why do we need to mention "F1" twice in quick succession on the same sentence? Have a read through Wikipedia:Writing better articles and see if that gives you some ideas.
The sources in the article look reasonably good, but I spotted one citation to the Daily Mirror, which I would criticise as being inappropriate for a BLP. While I appreciate some of the sources are offline, or subscription only, you should spot check as many online sources as you can, and cross-reference carefully that the claims in the article are backed up by the sources given. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)18:23, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Ah okay. Sorry, I seem to be finding it difficult to keep up with replies at the moment, and I'm struggling to write more than a couple of sentences for stubs. Where has my wiki-mojo gone? :-( Ritchie333(talk)(cont)00:26, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Cabayi#Oppose
Two years ago I was blocked indefinitely from Wikipedia at the diligent and sustained actions of Cabayi. Back then he had no administrative privileges. He was however very active on flagging for speedy deletion recently created articles, and on pitching suspected sockpuppeters to authorised administrators.
The dispute started with his flagging for deletion of two article that I created, where I was describing some of my software products:
I decided to start these two articles after realizing that people were using them without proper credit. There was also a time when the majority of animated GIFs on Wikimedia were my uploads. Wikipedia programers even had to make changes to their software to be able to handle the large size animated GIFs that I uploaded. - see some of the animated GIFs.
To save my MeKin2D article, I uploaded in a hurry additional animated-GIF as pasimi, and also made edits including responding to Cabayi without switching accounts. Until then I used only simiprof for Wikipedia edits. This was considered a line crossing, and went downhill from there.
One thing that was very frustrating, was that my D_2D & D_3D article was up for deletion, while I was blocked and unable to make any edits and defend my article. There were instances when I felt helpless like a wildebeest chased to exhaustion by hyenas (or one hyena), and then being eaten alive. Another frustrating thing was seeing that Cabay had a history of very few and insignificant additions to Wikipedia, the vast majority of his edits being deletions.
According to his edit history, his productivity on blocking accounts and on deleting articles went up ten fold, now that he is an administrator.
Thank you for taking the time to read this, and have a nice day,
simiprof / pasimi
I had a look at D_2D & D_3D and don't understand what makes "Are plotting programs written in Free Pascal that were developed to assist engineers and scientists with their data analysis and visualization problems. Input data should be provided as ASCII files formatted as x,y pairs or x,y,z triplets. Graphic output can be in DXF format or as raster image." suitable prose for a general-purpose encyclopedia. If you're particularly aggrieved about losing the text, I can restore that so you can put it on another website, but beyond that I don't really think there's any case to answer for these two articles. Although I opposed Cabayi at RfA, I also said that I recognised it was a minority view and felt that a successful RfA, with a significant minority of opposition, would give them better feedback about what they needed to watch out for, and ultimately make them a better administrator. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)00:36, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
On 12 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sandister Tei, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Wikimedian of the Year Sandister Tei(pictured) of Ghana is a former multimedia journalist for Al Jazeera? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sandister Tei. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sandister Tei), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. 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.
Congratulations! With 6,888 views, your Sandister Tei hook qualified for DYKSTATS. Accordingly, it has been included at DYKSTATS December. It was nice to see a hard-working young Wikipedian featured on the Main Page. Keep up the good work! Cbl62 (talk) 20:00, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
I'm surprised this wasn't pulled, or at least logged at WP:ERRORS given the refimprove template on it - correctly as I've just discovered something on it I believe to be factally incorrect. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)16:17, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Congratulations! With 11,111 views, your Ziggy Stardust Tour hook is one of the most viewed hooks for the month of December. Even more impressive given that it appeared during a 12-hour queue. Accordingly, it has been included at DYKSTATS December. Keep up the good work! Cbl62 (talk) 20:27, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
John B123, This is the article's second GA, and several issues were fixed in the first, plus the copyvio concerns later. So that gives me confidence there shouldn't be too much to quibble about this. However, a couple of things stand out for me, and think you need to go into more depth.
Firstly, the lead should be bundled up into less paragraphs, as it is, it's quite disjointed and makes it difficult for a non-expert (like me) to understand what Stephanides' life was about. Similarly, the coverage of the late 1930s is reduced to a few single sentence paragraphs which look more like a list than integrated prose. I would ask the nominator if this is appropriate coverage in the sources available (which is part of the GA criteria - "broad in coverage").
OK, I rewrote the 1930 section, as well as some text from the "Postwar period" section (to avoid repetition). As to the lead, frankly, I don't know what to remove (everything seems important to me). Maybe you or John B123 could help me? Thanks much to both of you for your comments and suggestions. Taurus Littrow (talk) 17:26, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Why is "Island Trails" described as a "bibliographical rarity"? I don't understand what that means. I'd go through the article and if there's anything else that you might not immediately grasp, ask the nominator about it.
I'd also check over WP:Writing better articles carefully, as there are several things that will normally leap out once you've done a couple of reviews and got used to knowing what works well for readers. For example, "Stephanides spent his early years in Bombay, and since his family only spoke English at home, it was Stephanides' native language" (second instance could be "his"), or "It was only then that Stephanides began to learn Greek, at the age of 11. He would speak Greek with a strong British accent." could be pared down to "It was only then, aged 11, that Stephanides began learning Greek, which he spoke with a strong British accent".
(second instance could be "his") -- Done.
It was only then, aged 11, that Stephanides began learning Greek -- Well, I wanted to emphasize that Theodore started learning Greek at the age of 11; this is what the respective source (Dean Kalimniou) says. Taurus Littrow (talk) 17:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
I personally take the view that you should ask any questions necessary to understand how the article presents itself and what might be done to improve it. The GA criteria doesn't mandate brilliant prose and sentence structures (that's what FAs are for), but it doesn't hurt to ask anything you might think help. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)16:46, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Drummer jokes, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. It's been a wild year, and I wanted to take a moment to thank you for your contributions and for the role you play in making Wikipedia as good as it can be. It was a pleasure interacting with you this year. I wish you and your loved ones all the best this December and in the year to come. Thanks Ritchie, for taking a chance on me and giving me a great opportunity. Cheers, Eddie891TalkWork18:49, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
Merry Christmas Ritchie333
Hi Ritchie333, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and healthy New Year, Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia, –Davey2010Talk20:05, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and your family. Hope you are well and looking forward to what you come up with next year. Maybe spending tomorrow watching paint dry. Whispyhistory (talk) 17:39, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you Whispyhistory, fortunately my children are young enough to be exempt from being away from me at Christmas (having checked to make certain that's the case) so things will be a little odd without the whole family but these days I look forward to them ripping open presents and saying "Wow, that is AWESOME" over whatever I get (which I would like to be this but will more likely be this), so we'll get through it okay. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)17:42, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
No elfing way! Just the rhyme, the design, the floor and the background but not the elf its-elf or the packages. Always remember where there's a Wills there's a way!Atsme💬📧17:12, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
... with best wishes for a much better year in 2021.
X
Merry Christmas & Happy New Year
X Bollocks! Complete brain fart on my part. I thought I had sent you a 'card' when I sent Harry's. Pissed again. Please accept this late greeting. I always remember your helpful and humourous assistance Ritchie, even when I was a newbie. Remember Saturday Zoo? Squirrels! So much appreciated your help. Where is Evans? I do hope he is still active. Mad git! I hope you and yours are doing good, and are keeping sane in these strange times. Si. Simon Adler (talk) 06:22, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you Martin. Well, 2021 can't be any worse than 2020 can it? At least we'll start off with Trump getting booted out of the White House. In handcuffs, perhaps. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)16:52, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, Ritchie333! I didn't mean to step on your toes when protecting the article. Though I will say... I'm happy to see that we both agreed that a two-week month of semi-protection was necessary here. ;-) I hope you're doing well, by the way. I hope you had a good new year. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)14:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Oshwah, I protected for a month. This is not just common or garden vandalism, this is a Nazi sympathiser trying to whitewash Wikipedia with sockpuppets. That requires a much larger cluebat per WP:NOFUCKINGNAZIS. Do you mind if I switch protection back to what I had in mind. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)14:53, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
I saw the same thing, and I agree with your observations. Oops! I meant to say "a month", not "two weeks" above. We both protected the article for the same duration with the expiration set to February 3, 2021. If I'm mistaken, please feel free to restore the protection you set. Also, I'll be pinging you soon in a discussion I'm having with a user. You took away his rollback flag (which I agree was necessary), but it seems like he's continuing the same habit. I thought maybe you'd like to give input to the message I'm sending him... ~Oshwah~(talk)(contribs)15:05, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
I gave this user a message yesterday detailing the problems with their edits but they seem to have ignored and made another batch of bad edits this morning 2 of which you have reverted. What should be done? SK2242 (talk) 12:31, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
I don't subscribe to the school of thought that you can't use admin tools in the subject areas where you edit - but I can't think of the last time I closed a road AFD, let alone one that could be considered controversial. --Rschen775421:40, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
I haven't looked at the article so I'm not sure who edited it, and just read through the AfD. It looks like a couple of those "difficult" ones that nobody else wanted to close. I don't think working on lots and lots of London street articles, and doing the odd copyedit on Michigan road articles like Mackinac Bridge really qualifies as "involved". By way of a similar example, I don't think writing several women GAs and being a strong supporter of Women in Red disqualifies me from closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samantha Brick (2nd nomination). Ritchie333(talk)(cont)21:48, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
It's certainly more than copyedits; with the numerous disagreements going back years including comments such as and a pile of your project's GA reviews were brought up for criticism last year for not being up to scratch[1] that extend as late as last year I am concerned that your close could be seen as not impartial. --Rschen775422:03, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
I did't directly mention this in the AfD, but I took your comment "But due to the size of the article I could see it being merged somewhere else (as I would probably have done if I was the author)" as one of the viewpoints showing there was not a consensus to delete. As for the earlier discussions, certainly in May 2019 (about 18 months ago) I was still going through serious depression, which I was hoping to get finally resolved before Covid showed up, and I apologise for lashing out at people. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)16:42, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
I appreciate that and I think the outcome is reasonable - but I am concerned that 1) given that you basically have said "many USRD GAs/articles are not very good" over the course of several years - that people could think that you have prejudged the outcome, since after all this was a USRD GA and the outcome was, in essence, getting rid of the article. That doesn't instill confidence in the process. 2) Because of this - I am concerned that you might use the admin tools in a controversial manner in the U.S. roads subject area where you have had numerous disagreements with the primary editors. --Rschen775423:30, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
That wasn't the answer I was looking for. So, you are saying that using the administrative tools contrary to WP:INVOLVED, in an area that you have expressed very strong opinions about, is on the table? I will quote: This is because involved administrators may have, or may be seen as having, a conflict of interest in disputes to which they have been a party or about which they have strong feelings. Even if you don't feel that you were unbiased, others may feel that you were. --Rschen775401:46, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
100,000th edit!
100,000th edit award
Hello Ritchie333. Let me be the first to congratulate you on your 100,000th edit! You are now entitled to place the 100,000 Edit Star on your bling page! or you could choose to display the {{User 100,000 edits}} user box. Or both! Thanks for all your work at the 'pedia! Cheers, — ~~~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarnetteD (talk • contribs) 01:11, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Merry December
Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs) is wishing you a MerryChristmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Hi, can you fully lock my talk page? I've just been getting a lot of deletion warnings and I really don't want to have to fight to keep articles. Nobody at the village pump could give me the coding needed to block out prod and AFD warnings so giving it a full lock is the only thing I can see which could do it. If people want to speak to me they can always email me.† Encyclopædius19:21, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@Encyclopædius: Sorry, the policy says "A user's request to have their own talk page protected is not a sufficient rationale by itself to protect the page, although requests may be considered if a reason is provided." I think it would have to be blatant and persistent vandalism, and the only realistic use cases I could ever see would be a potential semi-protection of WP:JIMBOTALK or temporary protection for a Wikipedian in a major news story. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)12:12, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
On 7 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Drummer jokes, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that an obituary of Neil Peart said he was "sent to Earth to destroy drummer jokes"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Drummer jokes. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Drummer jokes), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Hi Ritchie333, I can see from this tool that you are one of the currently active admins. I would like to request immediate semi-protection on Breathing as it is being mass-attacked by IPs and sock accounts. I think someone already made a request at the RPP but something needs to be done fast. Thank you. --Ashleyyoursmile!09:13, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
This seems like a good place to reflect on what on earth's going on here. Over the last couple of months (certainly since the pandemic started raging again) I've found it increasingly difficult to write anything. I used to be able to get articles through GA on a fairly regular basis, now I don't appear to have the skills to get a simple DYK hook through the process anymore, and a lot of other edits are looking at changes to articles I improved in the past and scratching my head working out whether they've been improved or not. It's small wonder I've got interested in other things and taken breaks for days at a time and greatly reduced my editing activity. However, I do still read articles that I'm interested in, so there is something for me to contribute towards, I'm just wondering if it'll be little more than the odd copyedit or typo fix from now on.
Does anyone else feel like this? Is it just a natural attrition for all Wikipedians ... ultimately, push come to shove, you'll retire or get kicked out? Ritchie333(talk)(cont)22:05, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes, yes, yes, me too! You could substitute my name for yours, signing that comment. But no, I don't think it's "natural". I think there's a real pathology about it. A significant part of it is the outside world: the pandemic, and whatever-the-hell is going on here in the US. But another significant part of it is that en-Wiki has gotten... ugly. I've been observing this all over the place, and a very large percentage of my recent comments here have been related to it. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:18, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Review Dan Friedkin Suggested Edits?
Hi Ritchie333, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind taking a look at our suggested edits on the Dan Friedkin TALK page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dan_Friedkin
We chatted about a month ago about how we might be better served updating this page over creating a new article for The Friedkin Group. I've worked to make them pretty neutral and cited but open to any feedback. Thanks! LucyArn (talk) 18:29, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
LucyArn, Sure, it'll be probably be in a couple of days' time as I'm busy running around getting Christmas presents sorted and delivered (for reasons I needn't explain, sticking them under a tree and expecting people to turn up en masse to get them is not happening this year). Ritchie333(talk)(cont)00:28, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Ritchie333, thank you, good to know! Will get those sorted out and ping you again. I would do it myself but I think it best if an editor pushes live to avoid any conflict of interest issues. LucyArn (talk) 22:17, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Ritchie333, Hi there! Hope you had a nice holiday - Happy New Year! I've updated the citations in question on the suggested edits. Let me know if it's possible you could push these live for me? Thanks! LucyArn (talk) 02:17, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Monopoly question
Hey! I noticed on the article on Westmoreland Street it mentioned that the street is featured on a Dublin edition of the Monopoly board (I have removed it for the moment, as there was no citation, and seems to be a different edition to the one we're working from.) What are your thoughts on including that bit of info, if you can find a citation for it, useful to the article or not? Smirkybec (talk) 23:36, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
That first Irish Times piece is funny! I haven't kept up with these new fangled Monopoly boards ;) On a side note, I'm tempted to point the board to the main articles for Rathmines (not a bad article) and Ranelagh (could do with a little love), as from very quick casting about, I think the specific roads might be challenging to find much to write about. Smirkybec (talk) 20:09, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I should really have another go at one of the Irish Monopoly streets. The Dublin Encyclopedia is not as verbose and comprehensive as The London Encyclopedia, and while there is a lot to mine out of it, it doesn't go too far beyond a paragraph or two for each individual article. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)20:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I took a bit of a break after my 2020 366 stretch of writing a new article every day, but I'm back working my way through my two library books (The Destruction of Dublin primarily) so I'm bouncing around the place as I work through it. I'm going to keep picking away at it, I bought a few more tombs on Dublin so it'll keep me busy for a while yet! Smirkybec (talk) 21:37, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Trafalgar Square
You have reverted a legitimate edit on Trafalgar Square which was correctly sourced. Indeed clearly Chantrey could not have completed this work as he was DEAD!--Stephencdickson (talk) 14:43, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Stephencdickson, I didn't understand what "necessarily executed by Thomas Earle" means. I was trying to look up the source to find more information. Pointing to a book is insufficient; we need to know specifics such as page or chapter number. Otherwise it's too easy for mistakes and errors to creep in (eg: see any edit summary of mine that says "the source does not say that"). Do you have another source I can easily look at? Ritchie333(talk)(cont)15:23, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Well "necessarily" means Chantrey was dead so someone else had to fulfil the commission. There are a few sources confirm that Earle trained under Chantrey and returned to his studio in the year before Chantrey died. My primary source is an old book on sculptors. However might I suggest thast you query PRIOR to reverting an edit as it just wastes everyone's time.--Stephencdickson (talk) 15:30, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
.jpg)
_(14573454469).jpg)
.jpg)
_(14752756965).jpg)
