User talk:Boghog

Archives

Archive 1 - 2007 Archive 2 - 2008 Archive 3 - 2009 Archive 4 - 2010 Archive 5 - 2011 Archive 6 - 2012 Archive 7 - 2013 Archive 8 - 2014 Archive 9 - 2015 Archive 10 - 2016 Archive 11 - 2017 Archive 12 - 2018 Archive 13 - 2019 Archive 14 - 2020 Archive 15 - 2021 Archive 16 - 2022 Archive 17 - 2022 Archive 18 - 2023

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Hello Boghog,

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!

Hello Boghog,

Backlog

The October drive reduced the backlog from 9,700 to an amazing 0! Congratulations to WaddlesJP13 who led with 2084 points. See this page for further details. The queue is steadily rising again and is approaching 2,000. It would be great if <2,000 were the “new normal”. Please continue to help out even if it's only for a few or even one patrol a day.

2022 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2022 cup for 28,302 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 80/day. There was one Gold Award (5000+ reviews), 11 Silver (2000+), 28 Iron (360+) and 39 more for the 100+ barnstar. Rosguill led again for the 4th year by clearing 49,294 redirects. For the full details see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone!

Minimum deletion time: The previous WP:NPP guideline was to wait 15 minutes before tagging for deletion (including draftification and WP:BLAR). Due to complaints, a consensus decided to raise the time to 1 hour. To illustrate this, very new pages in the feed are now highlighted in red. (As always, this is not applicable to attack pages, copyvios, vandalism, etc.)

New draftify script: In response to feedback from AFC, the The Move to Draft script now provides a choice of set messages that also link the creator to a new, friendly explanation page. The script also warns reviewers if the creator is probably still developing the article. The former script is no longer maintained. Please edit your edit your common.js or vector.js file from User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js to User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js

Redirects: Some of our redirect reviewers have reduced their activity and the backlog is up to 9,000+ (two months deep). If you are interested in this distinctly different task and need any help, see this guide, this checklist, and spend some time at WP:RFD.

Discussions with the WMF The PageTriage open letter signed by 444 users is bearing fruit. The Growth Team has assigned some software engineers to work on PageTriage, the software that powers the NewPagesFeed and the Page Curation toolbar. WMF has submitted dozens of patches in the last few weeks to modernize PageTriage's code, which will make it easier to write patches in the future. This work is helpful but is not very visible to the end user. For patches visible to the end user, volunteers such as Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have been writing patches for bug reports and feature requests. The Growth Team also had a video conference with the NPP coordinators to discuss revamping the landing pages that new users see.

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• If you no longer wish to be a reviewer, please ask any admin to remove you from the group. If you want the tools back again, just ask at PERM.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Hello Boghog,

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.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and #wikimedia-npp ^connect on IRC.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Template:WikiProject Gene Wiki has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:15, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hand sanitizer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alcohol.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:52, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

W.r.t. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GPX4&diff=1241254795&oldid=1241252163

In my opinion the preprint provides sufficient evidence for the addition (especially since I qualified that the evidence is in vitro and that the evidence "suggests") even if it is not peer-reviewed. I agree that for controversial topics with abundant potential for conflicts of interest it may be wise to allow only peer-reviewed articles. In this case, however, the preprint is a detailed record of primary observations from standard biochemical assays; for a niche gene. Surely this passes the bar for evidence?

COI declaration: I am not on the author list and I do not know any of the authors nor am I from the institution or know anyone from those institutions. When I read an interesting article I sometimes share what I learn as small additions on Wikipedia. NANGYEUN (talk) 13:08, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your clarification. WP:PREPRINT is a bit more nuanced and the source may qualify as a reliable self-published source. As a compromisie, I have restored the source in this edit with {{Unreliable source?}}. Hopefully this study will eventually be published in a peer reviewed journal and the citation can be updated. Boghog (talk) 13:22, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair! Thanks for reconsidering :) NANGYEUN (talk) 23:02, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Boghog! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Stem cell therapy for macular degeneration, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from {{{https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12015-020-09990-9?}}}, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

• Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA 4.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:Stem cell therapy for macular degeneration and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-enwikimedia.org". Make sure they quote the exact page name, Stem cell therapy for macular degeneration, in their email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Stem cell therapy for macular degeneration. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA), version 4.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Stem cell therapy for macular degeneration with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Stem cell therapy for macular degeneration saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! ~~~~ ScribblingScribe - TALK 19:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your message. Please note that I only adjusted the citations. The text was provided by other editors. I agree it is a mess that require extensive editing. Boghog (talk) 19:52, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The text is sufficiently paraphrased that is no longer a copyright violation, hence I have have removed the copyright banner. Boghog (talk) 20:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for fixing it all! It's really cool how you do medicine too! ScribblingScribe - TALK 20:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Stem cell therapy for macular degeneration, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Photoreceptor.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Boghog, Thank you for your improvements to the article about the antagonistic pleiotropy hypothesis (APT). Do you have a view on whether the section on APTs role in DNA repair actually refers to APT? My impression is that it does not. Thanks in advance. Dr Dobeaucoup (talk) 08:35, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dr. Dobeaucoup. Thanks for your contribution to the APT article. I am not certain, but the following:

the disposable soma theory of aging (36), which posits that organisms have limited resources, such that a greater investment in reproduction would lead to a lower investment in DNA repair maintenance, causing accumulation of somatic mutations and aging.^[1] suggests that it does. Cheers. Boghog (talk) 12:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Boghog. I will add this useful material to the subsection on DNA repair. Dr Dobeaucoup (talk) 15:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]