WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a two week long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 14 January 2023.
Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
It seems based on the sources (mostly trivial mentions) in the article and my WP:BEFORE that WP:NBASIC and WP:GNG are failed. However, there might be a borderline case towards WP:NCREATIVE. I personally don't think being a cinematographer that isn't covered often in other WP:RSplayed a major role for the notable films listed in the Filmography. However, IMHO others might also reasonably make the case that the cinematography roles renders NCREATIVE being passed. Overall, potentially a tag of notability for now might be a good option. VickKiang(talk)02:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Stephanitis pyri, 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.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
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.
I saw you said that "this might be a case of WP:TOOSOON as references appear to be trivial mentions, short coverage, or non-WP:SIGCOV routine announcements," noting the length of the Collider piece, and stated that there isn't significant coverage, and suggested the write up in The Wrap. I can agree with you that the draft is promising, and that "more in-depth coverage will be gradually available", but I'd clarify that the series will, if reports are correct, be released in 2024 (like Draft:Moana (TV series)). That doesn't mean that there won't be news about it this year, however. However, if reports are correct, Hailey's On It! and Aztec Batman: Clash of Empires, to name some drafts I've either created or worked on, will be released, along with possibly Primos and Mulligan (two other drafts). Historyday01 (talk) 15:15, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
According to this source, With the new Tiana's Bayou Adventure ride, opening in 2024, will come the 2023 premiere of Disney+'s Tiana, an animated series starring the princess that will act as a sequel to the 2009 movie (published in Dec 2022), whereas this tweet from Disney suggests 'TIANA' has been delayed and will now release in 2024. 'MOANA' (TV series) no longer has a release date. Anyways I've corrected my date. Thanks! VickKiang(talk)20:28, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi VickKiang, I've marked missing citations with {{citation needed}} templates; there are more than I'd hoped to see there. You'll probably want to fix these before nominating the article for GA status. Cheers, Baffle☿gab07:38, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello VickKiang. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ayesha Mofiz Mala, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Salviogiuliano10:10, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No confusion at all, don't worry. I just use WP:CSDH to automate declining speedy deletion nominations and, in this case, didn't check the thingy notified the right person. Sorry for the ping. Cheers. Salviogiuliano10:47, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Amaekuma: I appreciate your contributions but you added this ref from Forbes. However, the piece is not from an editor but from a contributor (evident by the text next to the author's name). Per WP:FORBES, contributor articles aren't necessarily reliable as they lack the editorial oversight that staff-written ones has, unless if the author is a subject-matter expert. Do you know if the author has subject-matter-expertise? Thanks. VickKiang(talk)23:01, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
His name is Ollie Barder and his bio says this about him:
@DareshMohan: Yes, as archived or offline sources are valid. I'm assuming that this is just because the review link is relatively old and not maintained by the newspaper website, instead of the article being retracted/deleted. If so, WP:V which states that Do not reject reliable sources just because they are difficult or costly to access. Some reliable sources are not easily accessible. In this case, this is a reliable full-length review that can be accessed via the archives.
Still, I'm unsure if this topic passes WP:GNG or WP:NFILM. Two sources that are independent, reliable, secondary, and meets SIGCOV are of course required for GNG, whereas NFILM requires 2+ reviews, major award, etc... as you know. The other sources appear to me quite trivial, this has one short paragraph that mainly lists the cast, this only mentions the film twice, etc. I didn't find much to contribute to notability based on my quick WP:BEFORE search but if you do find more please ping me. VickKiang(talk)02:38, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This review has been ongoing for well over a month now. I understand that it is important to take the time for yourself and disconnect from the online world, however I believe I have been more than reasonable in the time taken to complete this review. If the remaining improvements have not been addressed within the next week I will fail the article; please prioritise addressing these concerns when you return from your wikibreak. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 08:22, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article My Neighbor Totoro you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:My Neighbor Totoro for comments about the article, and Talk:My Neighbor Totoro/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sims2aholic8 -- Sims2aholic8 (talk) 12:43, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023
Hello VickKiang,
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
Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Hello!
Hi, VickKiang,
I was used to see your contributions on a daily basis and have been wondering what was up with you. I see you are taking a WikiBreak which I think is great. I've taken WikiBreaks, one for 6 months when I was just starting out and got into some idiotic disputes, and later for 2 years when I moved cross-country and had medical issues and I think I only am still editing because of the breaks that I took a long time ago. So, I'm all for taking breaks! But I just wanted to check in to say I've missed seeing you around and hope you are just busy with off-wiki life. I look forward to your return whenever that happens! I value your opinions and contributions. LizRead!Talk!05:05, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
Don't know if this is just an issue for Indian film pages but I noticed that sometimes the director himself edits his own film for promotion maybe. Is there any wiki rules on this. Also do actors have managers that manage their wiki pages? Isn't all this not allowed/they should say who they are on their user page right? See Anilsvsn who left a message on my talk page. (User_talk:DareshMohan#Sabari_(2023_film)). DareshMohan (talk) 05:59, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DareshMohan: I think that WP:COI covers this, which strongly discourages but does not completely disallow editing. According to COI, you should disclose your COI when involved with affected articles, which one should explicitly do at their user page or the talk page in question. Moreover, it is recommended for one to discuss and suggest edits on the talk pages first, excepting when fixing grammar/spelling/links/MOS-related stuff, or undoing blatant vandalism/spam/BLP violations. VickKiang(talk)06:24, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DareshMohan: The first ref mostly covers the cast and is announcement like IMHO, but it does have no quotes and is probably borderline SIGCOV and independent. The second ref is apparently a review per here but is a very short 7 sentence one instead being a full length complete review, plus many editors believe The Times of India is WP:MREL even for films. Only based on the two sources I’d be at a fairly weak delete assuming there’s no ATDs, but I haven’t given a more detailed search (which I’d do later when I have time), and other editors would likely also vote keep for this. Thanks. VickKiang(talk)22:34, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DareshMohan:WP:BUNDLE says related articles can be bundled, but also an article with a fair or better chance of standing on its own merits should not be bundled—nominate it separately… Bundling AfDs should be used only for clear-cut deletion discussions based on existing policy. If you're unsure, don't bundle it. It also recommends bundling to be done before any substantive comment, or when 2 voters have voted but all of these votes are per nom or obviously agree with you. In this case three editors already opined before bonding, who generally agree with you excepting for one redirect vote, but one later also doubted about the bundling. IMO, opinions or whether the bundling is “clear-cut” would vary for this discussion. However, in the future if you bundle articles it would be beneficial to do so at the very start of the discussion and leave cases more contentious than this to separate AfDs. Thanks. VickKiang(talk)02:26, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive
The closing instruction says, As long as no one has suggested any outcome besides not moving, the proposer of a move may close their own move request as withdrawn. In this case (and only in this case) of early closure the standards of determining appropriateness of non-admin closure do not apply; NAC must still be explicitly declared, however. Here, no one has commented at all besides you, withdrawing seems to be acceptable. You should still indicate why you closed the request (self-withdraw) and indicate that your close is a NAC one. Then again, I am not active in RM and am not an expert with common practice and expectations there. Thanks. VickKiang(talk)08:16, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Edward-Woodrow: IMO, GNG/NBIO applies here. Therefore, considering GNG/NBIO, the source the article contains has 300+ words with sufficient biographical detail and appear to meet SIGCOV IMO. The question IMO is reliability- on a cursory glance the website seems iffy, but the website notes that it is a web version of the book Eesti spordi biograafilise leksikoni (along with containing another database) per Google Translate (though I am unsure if the translated version is accurate). The Polish Wikipedia also suggests it being an encyclopedia-like lexicon. Because the encyclopedia appears to be reliable, if the website is still maintained with editorial oversight and have similar standards, then it will also be reliable. But I am not 100% sure due to the language barrier. My search on English failed to find more sourcing meeting GNG/NBIO, and I was unable to find an Estonian Wikipedia article for Poksi. So based what I can find this is probably not notable, but it's possible to likely there are Estonian language sourcing I can not find, so overall I would not AfD this due to being unfamiliar with Estonian sourcing. Also, applications of GNG for sport-related fields is polarising IMO, with highly different views and lots of debate on what meets GNG and what does not. Thanks. VickKiang(talk)01:38, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
New Page Review article queue, March to September 2023
Backlog update:
At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!
October backlog elimination drive:
A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.
PageTriage code upgrades:
Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.
Notability tip:
Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.
Reviewing tip:
If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.
We have an editor who seems to think that if the sources and the guidelines are not making the case, then maybe it is time to insult the other editors.
I never said you're incompetent, I meant that too the editors who expressed a redirect to the football club and for the admin who closed it too that. That is was I see as incompetent! Regards. Govvy (talk) 09:59, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is consensus on RSP that Guinness World Records should not be used to establish notability, so they do not help much here. As such there are two film reviews. If they are all reliable, it would be a NFILM#1 pass. However, for IndiaGlitz, the past discussions are largely inconclusive (with too few comments for a rough consensus) and editors have disagreed on whether it is a RS. I personally also doubt the website's reliability due to the lack of clear staff listings or editorial policies, though there is some usage by other sources on Google Books (and there might be more in Tamil, but I don't speak that language). So if you create this article IMO the notability is borderline and it might get nominated at AfD, where it might end in no consensus. VickKiang(talk)02:48, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
First and foremost, heartfelt thanks for replying. I was borderline not going to create and will not create it. 2 reliable reviews are needed. Btw, the language situation is more complicated in India (there are 5 main languages Hindi in North, and Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam in the south). The article in question was a Kannada film. DareshMohan (talk) 06:30, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Espresso Addict: I have added a note on the talk page stating that I am open to other editors adding the table from the Best Drama Script article back. I am not adding it because only listing winners for this award and not others seem incongruous, and to include the winners for all the awards (in either table or prose form) would take time and also rely extensively on non-independent references, which is possibly undue. However, I have no objections if other editors want to add it. Thanks. VickKiang(talk)07:09, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is how we finish up with so many separate awards lists that have no independent sourcing, or only implied sourcing as in this case. A quick check in WL suggests that the awards are covered in specialist press, but it's always easier to list winners based on the award site. Espresso Addict (talk) 07:45, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that generally paywalls and considerations that listing the awards in the main page is WP:UNDUE (my rationale above) can contribute to separate non-independent awards articles and lists. But I think for the Spur Awards, a better explanation is that many of the lists (including this one) were created all the way back in 2004, which (seems) to be before the establishment of WP:GNG and WP:N in 2006. There are some substantive coverage of the overall award, but basically all from two specialist magazines, True West Magazine and Wild West (other refs are much more brief or just press releases). However, for the Drama Script award, there is limited coverage anyway. VickKiang(talk)08:10, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.
This award is given to VickKiang for collecting more than 10 points during the October 2023 NPP backlog drive. Thank you so much for taking part and contributing to the drive! Hey man im josh (talk) 02:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Genuine doubts
Why can't any film with 3 reliable reviews be auto created by a Wikipedia bot? Why can't a bot scan the credits and update the cast section? In the times of AI, Wikipedia should advance. DareshMohan (talk) 08:03, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think a lot of chatbots (at least the free ones) are that good yet. Consider Don (2003 film), a random article you created. It's a pretty basic, start-class one. I fed into a few chatbots. ChatGPT 3.5 (vanilla)'s one is pretty bad. If you don't give details, it will write "Don" was released on October 20, 2006, receiving positive reviews from critics and audiences alike. Shah Rukh Khan's dual performance as both the antagonist and protagonist was widely praised for its depth and versatility. The film was lauded for its slick presentation, engaging narrative, and memorable performances for the reception. But the actual two reviews give a much more mixed impression. Further, GPT-3.5 is fundamentally poor at generating referencing. It just lists two refs, one to IMDb and one to the official trailer. It then adds an external link to an official website. This shows that if we have a fairly obscure (in Don's case) which requires a lot of Kannada language reference access, GPT-3.5 doesn't really make the cut. If it created that article and I came across that in new page patrol I am sure I would move it into draftspace or stubify, and tag for extensive cleanup.
I then asked Perplexity.ai to write a Wikipedia-style article. Perplexity has search engine access, so it can provide references and can access most of them, including the article you wrote. So, I asked it to write an article on a random film I thought of that has no Wikipedia article yet (The Lady Bird Diaries). The article it wrote still has some problems. It provides bare urls on default (which needs changing), cites IMDb and an unreliable source, and has some unreferenced puffery (i.e., compelling and insightful exploration of a significant historical figure). I did find this better than GPT-3.5 (note that GPT-3.5 has a cutoff by 2021), but I think that some human changes is still needed for Perplexity.ai for it to be converted to a Wikipedia-style basic start article. Whereas GPT-3.5's article is very poor and clearly will quickly be tagged (GPT-4's will be probably better, but I don't have a subscription). Thanks. VickKiang(talk)08:25, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am creating film articles with 3 reviews, 2 of which is reliable and 1 that may or may not be. Based on AfC, three is a good rule right? When there is 3 reliable reviews, without a doubt, the film is notable. DareshMohan (talk) 21:32, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
NFILM explicitly states that 2 reliable in-depth reviews is enough in criteria 1, unlike GNG (which technically says "multiple" but this is open to different interpretation). Therefore, 2 reliable reviews is probably all right. VickKiang(talk)09:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see you have been editing for a while but I only ran into your edits tonight as I patrolled CSD categories. It's nice to see you back! I understand if you can't keep up the pace you had before but it's great to have you back spending some time on the project. I can always rely on your judgment. LizRead!Talk!08:53, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
VickKiang, I was shocked to see this account blocked! I hope you can straighten out whatever has happened to this account that caused it to be compromised. LizRead!Talk!20:09, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello VickKiang,
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.
Allow me to add to other's notes here — I'm shocked I'm only just finding out about this! It was always nice to run into you at NPP, and as another editor working on bringing Studio Ghibli–related articles up to GA, we could use as many hands on deck as we've got! I hope you're doing well, and I hope you decide to return to editing one day. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
_(14573454469).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_(14752756965).jpg)
