I have unreviewed a page you curated
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)
I have sent you a note about a page you reviewed
Hello, Saff V.
Thank you for creating Funeral of Qasem Soleimani.
User:Prof tpms, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Good work
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Prof tpms}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Prof TPMS (talk) 14:23, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Saff V.
Thank you for creating Funeral of Qasem Soleimani.
User:Prof tpms, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Good work
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Prof tpms}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Prof TPMS (talk) 14:23, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020
Hello Saff V.,
- Source Guide Discussion
The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.
- Redirects
New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.
- Discussions and Resources
- There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
- A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
- A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
- A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.
- Refresher
Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.
Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here
16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
February 2020
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:58, 19 February 2020 (UTC)- I've warned you several times about the need to edit collaboratively at the page about the MEK. While none of the editors there have demonstrated particularly good behavior, your edit warring over content that did not have consensus, and your inability or unwillingness to understand the page restrictions, suggest you need a break from that page. When you reported another editor to ANEW, you were reminded that the article had a consensus required restriction; then you chose to violate it anyway, with some extremely wiki-lawyerish arguments on the talk page. Please demonstrate an ability to work constructively and collaboratively on other related articles, otherwise I will likely expand this block to a topic-ban. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:47, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Saff V. (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Yes, I should have observed the consensus required and I really did in previous cases. Also, please review ALL of MY edits on 19 February in MEK. Ypatch was roll backing all my changes. Some of them were removal of duplicated things. I promise to be more careful about observing this restriction and give me another chance. Please take a look at my constructive contributions. Indef block for the first time during my editing history was very sever here [[User:Saff V.|Saff V.]] ([[User talk:Saff V.#top|talk]]) 14:13, 20 February 2020 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1=Yes, I should have observed the consensus required and I really did in previous cases. Also, please review ALL of MY edits on 19 February in MEK. Ypatch was roll backing all my changes. Some of them were removal of duplicated things. I promise to be more careful about observing this restriction and give me another chance. Please take a look at my constructive contributions. Indef block for the first time during my editing history was very sever here [[User:Saff V.|Saff V.]] ([[User talk:Saff V.#top|talk]]) 14:13, 20 February 2020 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1=Yes, I should have observed the consensus required and I really did in previous cases. Also, please review ALL of MY edits on 19 February in MEK. Ypatch was roll backing all my changes. Some of them were removal of duplicated things. I promise to be more careful about observing this restriction and give me another chance. Please take a look at my constructive contributions. Indef block for the first time during my editing history was very sever here [[User:Saff V.|Saff V.]] ([[User talk:Saff V.#top|talk]]) 14:13, 20 February 2020 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}