Hi, I'm Barkeep49. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Bridge21, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Barkeep49 (talk) 16:46, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Saff - I didn't intentionally unreview this page you had done. I had been looking at reviews of someone who was doing UPE and grew alarmed when I saw a crypto related topic. So sorry about that. But I am skeptical, after having now looked into it, that this is a notable topic. What did you find that led you to mark it reviewed? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:15, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Saff V.. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is WP:RX.
Message added 17:14, 22 November 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

——SN54129 17:14, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Saff V.: I am contributing to Wikipedia Asia Month and also combining it with the Women in Red campaign. I have been writing a biographical article on Puah Rakovsky and she was a 19th century feminist. The references I have tagged are from journals and libraries and the person is notable. Can you review the references once again and help me understand why you think the article lacks notability? Thanks!--Parul Thakur (talk) 10:26, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ParulThakur:, Thanks for the description and creating the article. Yes, the used sources seem to be independent and credible, but they are all sources belongs to Jewish. I wonder if you try adding some neutral sources to the article?Saff V. (talk) 06:49, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you add a notable tag ?? Bivash Maji (talk) 13:33, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bivashmaji: which article?Saff V. (talk) 06:26, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Women in the Quran has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:48, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Arthistorian1977. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Puja Sharma, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Arthistorian1977 (talk) 09:23, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Saff V., I should tell you there was a sizeable copyright violation in the article and much of its history has been revision deleted. Some of the text was directly copied from copyrighted sources and because of earlier rev-deletions, I couldn't pinpoint the editor responsible. Since you're a prolific editor there, please report any further copyvios you might detect to an administrator and ask for revdel of the relevant material. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:26, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Baffle gab1978: I really appreciate for efforts, the article definitely looks much better. I thought the article could suffer from copyvio, Do you investigate this issue during doing copy edit? As well as did you removed the unrelated content of the article? Saff V. (talk) 06:29, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Iran Action Group has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't seem notable enough for stand-alone page. Simply warrants mention on United States withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Iran–United States relations, etc. Loksmythe (talk) 17:49, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Loksmythe (talk) 17:49, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Iran Action Group is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iran Action Group until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Loksmythe (talk) 17:50, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer of the Year

This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.

Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days

Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	Rosguill (talk)	47,395	Patrol Page Curation
2	Onel5969 (talk)	41,883	Patrol Page Curation
3	JTtheOG (talk)	11,493	Patrol Page Curation
4	Arthistorian1977 (talk)	5,562	Patrol Page Curation
5	DannyS712 (talk)	4,866	Patrol Page Curation
6	CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk)	3,995	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	3,812	Patrol Page Curation
8	Boleyn (talk)	3,655	Patrol Page Curation
9	Ymblanter (talk)	3,553	Patrol Page Curation
10	Cwmhiraeth (talk)	3,522	Patrol Page Curation

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

Redirect autopatrol

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.

Source Guide Discussion

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.

This month's refresher course

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]