User talk:Aunva6

Summarize Timeline Fact Check

Hello Aunva6,

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

Suggestions:

• There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
• Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
• Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
• This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

Summarize Timeline Fact Check

Summarize Timeline Fact Check

WikiProject Scouting | May 2024 Notes for May: Looking for something to work on? Try looking at, Category:Scouting articles needing attention. Some important articles that need help: The Scout Association, NAYLE, Philmont Training Center, BSA Leadership Training, COPE We are working to develop a featured portal, look here if you want to help. Looking for a new project? perhaps authoring an article on Aids to Scoutmastership Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage | Help us plan future events Become a member | Opt-out of notifications | watch

--evrik ^(talk) May 22, 2024

"Homophobia IS what homophobia does

Listen, you, homophobia IS what homophobia does. That vandal is removing SOURCED LINKS to the article topic, Mihailo Petrović Alas, having been a lover of his charge, prince Đorđe Karađorđević. The links are in serious newspapers with decades long traditions and they are reliable. They quote the prince's father, King Peter having spoken about the son's and the teacher's liaison.

No normal people has a problem with that FACT. Only homophobes do.

When one keeps removing those valiud links claiming that they are purportedly unreliable, it is homophobia very clearly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annabelleigh (talk • contribs) 21:47, 1 April 2026 (UTC)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annabelleigh (talk • contribs)

Please see WP:NPA and WP:ASPERSIONS -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 22:00, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2026).

Administrator changes

• ARandomName123

• Biblioworm
• Causa sui
• Djsasso
• Espresso Addict
• Fenix down
• Firefangledfeathers
• GeneralNotability
• NawlinWiki
• Northamerica1000
• Smalljim

Checkuser changes

Giraffer

Oversight changes

Kj cheetham

Giraffer

Guideline and policy news

• The content of Wikipedia:Writing articles with large language models has been updated following a request for comment. It now prohibits using LLMs to generate content, with exceptions for translation and copy-editing.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the GSCASTE extended-confirmed restriction in the Indian military history case has been narrowed. It now applies to caste-related topics in South Asia, and the preemptive protection remedy has been amended accordingly.
• The arbitration case Pbsouthwood has been closed.
• The arbitration case Maghreb has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 7 April.

---

You are invited to participate in the Destubathon of the Americas, a contest/editathon which will run from May 1 to May 31. The goal is to destub as many of our 475,000+ stubs for the Americas (from Alaska down to Chile) as possible. A good chance to have fun in expanding many of our old stale stubs and win up to £2000 ($2680) in Amazon vouchers for expanding stub articles. Sign up in the Contestants/participants section on the contest page if interested. Even if not interested in prizes you are still warmly welcome to participate in it as an editathon! Hopefully we can achieve something significant in the month of May together! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:41, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Summarize Timeline Fact Check

Hey--I'm ashamed to admit that I don't know all the ins and outs of arbitration procedures (and I can't quite follow what the relationship between 3 and 5 is), but I looked at some of the articles you requested protection for, and their histories, and those histories seem to be very boring. Juang people, for instance--there was some socking in 2023, and then some guy named User:Sitush, but it's all pretty peaceful. In other words I'm not convinced of the value, or the need besides the formal regulation. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:32, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

my thought is that, in cases where any edits to the article would be restricted ECR, it only makes sense to add the technical enforcement of that restriction. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 14:55, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

@Aunva6 My understanding is that WP:CT/AI is the only CTOP at present where extended-confirmed protection ought to be applied pre-emptively to the article, per this ArbCom decision; sysops have the discretion to apply ECP to articles related to articles covered by other CTOPs, but those aren't mandatory. Some may not wish to apply this pre-emptive protection without disruption, per WP:PREEMPTIVE.

On another note, a couple of the RFPP folks have created WP:RFPP/Batch, which you might find a useful page. The goal of this page is to separate the more urgent requests (WP:RFPP/I) from those that might not require immediate administrative action. It's still being workshopped, so feel free to hop over to the talk page if you have any ideas to improve it, or just let me know your thoughts. Best, Staraction (talk · contribs) 16:29, 20 April 2026 (UTC) (please ping on reply) (Non-administrator comment)

WP:CT/SASG states

5) Administrators are permitted to preemptively protect mainspace articles covered by the extended-confirmed restriction for caste-related topics in South Asia when there is a reasonable belief that they will be the target of disruption.

If a reviewing admin thinks there's no reasonable belief, that's their prerogative i should think, but given that they're already restricted to extended-confirmed editors, it would be nonsensical to say it's wrong to apply technical protection, at least to me. The way I look at it, the admin isn't the one restricting the article... it's already restricted by arbcom, the admin is just enforcing that restriction by technical means.

On the other note... that batch tool is a great thing, i was leery about spamming RFPP, but didn't want to bug an admin individually. @Staraction: -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 17:14, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts! (& sorry about the revert, 'twas a misclick). Best, Staraction (talk · contribs) 17:16, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Basically, the way I look at it is that for any topic under ECR, ECR is, de facto, ECP. Applying technical ECP is simply instating it de jure. As WP:ECR states, If a page (other than a "Talk:" page) mostly or entirely relates to the topic area, broadly construed, this restriction is preferably enforced through extended confirmed protection, though this is not required. PIA being a 'Thou Shalt' is removing the last five words of that because things are so hot there; point 5 of SA/SASG I agree seems kind of redundant given that line in ECR, but I read it as "things are bad enough in this topic area we want to emphasise this". - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:24, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

You're invited to the

IN-PERSON Minnesota Wikipedia User Group Meeting Date: Sunday, May 24, 2026 @ 1 to 3:30 PM (CT) Location: Lake Monster Brewing, 550 Vandalia Street #160, Saint Paul, Minnesota Meet, converse, and have a refreshing beverage with fellow Wikipedia editors and enthusiasts. All guests are welcome. If you don't wish to receive these invitations anymore, please remove your username from our invitation list. Thanks.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:13, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Good morning.

Please have a look to the above mentioned page and tell me if it's to your liking. Settignano (talk) 08:58, 23 April 2026 (UTC)