User talk:EvergreenFir

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello EvergreenFir,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon.

Getting the queue to 0

There are now 726 holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.
Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox.
Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards.


Admin Barkeep49 has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers.

This month's refresher course

Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources.

  • It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
  • It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.
Reviewer Feedback

Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13.

Second set of eyes
  • Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
  • Do be sure to have our talk page on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.
Arbitration Committee

The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights.

Community Wish list

There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion.

To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Seth Rollins

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Seth Rollins. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, EvergreenFir. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 16:35, 8 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.

Vanamonde (Talk) 16:35, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

  • Also from me. Bishonen | talk 16:30, 10 November 2019 (UTC).


Hey, for what it's worth, re: your RFA, these can be super-stressful, and it can really suck to see people you've never worked with dragging your name through the mud. Anyhow, I hope you're not too stressed out, and regardless of the outcome, you're a very strong editor and have always been easy to work with. Don't feel compelled to write back if you think it could hurt your chances for the tools. Face-smile.svg Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:34, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: thank you for the kind words. :) EvergreenFir (talk) 16:54, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Support from me, too. May I respectfully make one very small suggestion you might like to consider? (Ignore if you wish) I reckon that maybe renaming 'Accolades' to something more akin to 'Accolades/Insults' - or even adding a small preliminary commentary - might show those who are incapable of understanding why you've posted those links that you do so purely to show you've been accused of being almost everything nasty under the sun. That you can rise above this and show it more as a badge of honour is actually a great attribute, and simply serves to demean those who attempt to throw petty insults. Best, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:52, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tucker Carlson Tonight

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tucker Carlson Tonight. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Signature character amount 12-NOV-2019

Hi there! I noticed your signature is 217 characters. Even though this is well below the 255 maximum, there is a slightly better way to render it if you're interested. In the box below are the differences between your current sig and an identical version which uses only 185 characters:

Comparison of sig markups
The following is your current sig's markup, which is 217 characters:
Markup Renders as
[[User:EvergreenFir|'''<span style="color:#8b00ff;">Eve</span><span style="color:#6528c2;">rgr</span><span style="color:#3f5184;">een</span><span style="color:#197947;">Fir</span>''']] [[User talk:EvergreenFir|(talk)]]

The markup shown below renders the sig identically, but uses only 185 characters — a savings of 32 characters:

Markup Renders as
[[User:EvergreenFir|<b><span style="color:#80F;">Eve<span style="color:#62C;">rgr<span style="color:#358;">een<span style="color:#174;">Fir</span></b>]] [[User talk:EvergreenFir|(talk)]]
Because the link to the username part of your signature is a closed link, it shouldn't be necessary to list multiple closed spans after each color gradient (i.e., </span>). That, coupled with giving the three-code HEX instead of the full six-code HEX, will shave 32 characters off the signature. Of course you should test this and any similar markup which may you choose to use before posting, just to make sure.

If you have any talk page stalkers who know better than I about this, hopefully they'll correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure it should work out well enough to help reduce the size. Warm regards,  Spintendo  04:32, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Technically, Spintendo, your suggestion is invalid HTML. You've left out all the closing </span> tags but one; most browsers are smart enough to know what you mean, but it's not technically correct, and shouldn't really be relied on. Reinstating the closing tags brings the sig length up to 207 characters, for only an 11-character savings. I wouldn't bother, but it's all good, I suppose. Writ Keeper  16:24, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
I was hoping that strategy could be clarified as a workable / nonworkable one, which your input has done — so I thank you for that. I'm not entirely clear on how the invalid HTML would affect the day to day usage of that signature's rendering, but I'll leave that question to another forum. Thanks again. Warm regards,  Spintendo  13:22, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Cultural Appropriation (Norse Mythology) - Two Citations Found

Here are two citations. Can the revert be undone?

You reverted the new section added on 12th November, here:

Thanks for the help! בס״ד (talk) 17:27, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

About your adminship...

Congrats! =) I don't mean to put the cart before the horse here but it appears that the nomination will pass. As I said in my support comment though, be sure to try and address those who opposed your nomination. Good luck going forward! ^-^ - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:17, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

I tend to agree. - Ret.Prof (talk)
At least three of the opposers are people for whom I have zero liking and I didn't even see their comments before I voted to support! So I wouldn't worry too much. Deb (talk) 18:54, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Congrats, welcome to the cabal. You'll receive your secret decoder ring shortly. ‑Scottywong| [comment] || 17:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Gun-jumping seems appropriate here. Congratulations and, as I mentioned in my !vote, the opposes slay me. Bag 'em and tag 'em. Hope you enjoy being an admin! P. I. Ellsworthed. put'r there 20:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

@Knowledgekid87, Ret.Prof, Deb, Scottywong, and Paine Ellsworth: Thank you! Scotty, can I order the purple ring if available? Or if they're metal, white gold would be great. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:43, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Almost there

You're almost an administrator. :-) Only one hour left before it's closed. Interstellarity (talk) 20:15, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 20:46, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Slightly early, but congrats just the same. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:03, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

@Interstellarity, ThatMontrealIP, and Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) 03:44, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Chelsea Manning

FYI, in your response to q9, you misspelled Chelsea as Chelsey. --regentspark (comment) 21:20, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

@RegentsPark: My bad. Spelling was never my forte which is why I shy away from using the board in class. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:45, 16 November 2019 (UTC)


I've closed your RfA as successful. Good luck with extra tools! Maxim(talk) 23:27, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Creative-Tail-Objects-torch.svg New Admin Torch
From Girth Summit via ToBeFree to EvergreenFir: Congratulations for your successful request for adminship. Please guard this eternal flame and forward it to the next successful candidate – never break the chain. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Ooh, I like they layout - good job ToBeFree! Yes, congratulations from me too EvergreenFir - welcome to the team, if there's anything I can ever do to help please reach out. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 12:05, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Congratulations, and a good result. I'm glad you went for it and I know you will use the tools carefully and responsibly. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:33, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

align=left Welcome to the CABAL. We have snacks.

- CorbieVreccan 23:36, 15 November 2019 (UTC)


We don't actually have snacks. Or alcohol. It's all a lie. Best wishes anyway! Take those opposes onboard as the gift of feedback. :) --valereee (talk) 23:40, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

  • Congratulations EvergreenFir. Enjoy your new mop. Mop.svg - MrX 🖋 23:59, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Well done. When you get tired of scrabbling down the back of the sofa to find the right block message, check out my monobook, some kind person put some code there that makes that sort of thing a lot easier. ϢereSpielChequers 00:14, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
In lieu of t-shirts, we are now giving out complimentary Costco bears. Mz7 (talk) 02:03, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Congratulations. I've run out of admin T-shirts but I expect someone will find one for you even if it's second hand. Your RfA wasn't an easy ride and I know how you must have felt for 7 days - mine was also quite unpleasant. Many of the oppose votes can be discounted. I hope you will continue to support the process that promoted you and vote as often as possible. You'll also find some more very useful scripts for admins in my js file . Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:36, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Wow!, 250+supports (quite a few opposes but now you can prove them wrong:)) WOOP WOOP! Face-smile.svg Coolabahapple (talk) 01:00, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
Congratulations! RfAs can be brutal, I know. But it is to your benefit to see it through & not withdraw, although it can get personal at times, especially for female candidates.
You are now an admin! Take it slow at first, read the manual (guidance pages) & ask any admins any questions you might have. We may not have the answer but can probably point you in the right direction! Good luck! Liz Read! Talk! 01:15, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Yep, congratulations! Airbornemihir (talk) 02:40, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi Evergreen! I don't subscribe to the perception that adminship is a promotion; you can't be promoted when you make no money from the thing. To me it's 100% a trust position, so I don't like to "congratulate", per se. But I will congratulate you for having endured that awful hazing session that is the RFA. Congratulations! You will make a great admin. I trust that you will ask other admins for advice, I trust that you will steer clear from adminning in areas that other people thought you might be deficient in, and overall, I trust you and it's lovely to see more women get the mop. Now clean up aisle five! You might want to peek at my tools file to see if anything might be of use, but I bet there's tons of tools I have no knowledge of that could help you more. Go EvergreenFir! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:06, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

@Maxim, ToBeFree, CorbieVreccan, Valereee, MrX, WereSpielChequers, Kudpung, Coolabahapple, Liz, Puddleglum2.0, Airbornemihir, and Cyphoidbomb: Thank you all! I appreciate the support and the comments/advice. I will definitely "take it slow" and ease my way into this. As many of you mentioned, Wikipedia's RfA process is rough (especially for women, [in my case] non-binary/genderqueer folks, and trans folks in general) but it was worth it. I hope to gain the trust of folks who are weary or opposed, but I know that will take time.

Valereee - I hear the cake was a lie too. And thank you. I will definitely take the oppose !votes on board. I appreciated their input and do understand (most of) their positions.

Cyphoidbomb - I had decided early on in the RfA process that if I was successful, I'd use the mop icon as that's what this is. Just a glorified janitor in many cases.

A very special thanks to Ritchie333, Vanamonde93, and Samwalton9 for all their support and encouragement. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:02, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

  • I'll say congratulations to echo the above, but per Cyphoidbomb you've just got some extra buttons now :) I hope you find them useful and continue to play an integral part in the upkeep of this encyclopedia! Sam Walton (talk) 08:08, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Congrats - well done on staying cool, I know it can be tough when the opposes start coming in, but I feel confident you can show them their concerns were unjustified - you're going to be a great addition to the mop corps. Have fun with all these sparkly buttons in really unhelpful places! Nosebagbear (talk) 14:15, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Felicitations and welcome to the team. There is a learning curve but it's not very steep. Feel free to drop me a line with any questions or if you need help with anything. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:09, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Very happy to see this was successful. Best of luck, and if you need anything, feel free to drop me a line. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:58, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Oops, sorry for mis-identifying you. I'll try to remember in the future. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:03, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Congratulations EvergreenFir! Best wishes to our newest admin. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:29, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Now that the RfA week is over, you have a challenge

Now that the RfA week is over, I hope you will be able to shake off the wikistress. Congratulations on getting the bit. Hope that you will continue your good work with equal (if not greater) enthusiasm and prove the naysayers wrong, denying them an "I told you so.." moment. Regards.--DBigXray 06:54, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

I wanted to post same message. Congratulations for new journey! — Harshil want to talk? 07:21, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
Congratulations. I am sure Wikipedeia will be better off because of your service (and more interesting). - Ret.Prof (talk) 15:05, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Margaret A. Zahn has been accepted

Margaret A. Zahn, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SamHolt6 (talk) 00:05, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
Btw thank you for clarifying a potential conflict of interest on your part; your willingness disclose a possible connection does you credit as an upstanding editor. Best. SamHolt6 (talk) 00:23, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
@SamHolt6: Thank you very much! EvergreenFir (talk) 03:39, 17 November 2019 (UTC)


You really are a member of the club.[1] -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:45, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

@Ad Orientem: Lol it seems so! Didn't know Yourname is still active. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:46, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Regarding Farah Khan Ali

Hi EvergreenFir! I went back and found I used the wrong CSD tag, and believe that A1: no context and A7 definitely apply, because the article is too short to ascertain if that article talks about one specific individual and not multiple individuals of the same name. Also A7 is self-explanatory. But since you have reviewed the article I'm stopping short of IAR tagging for now. Regards, Optakeover(U)(T)(C) 07:12, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

@Optakeover: feel free to re-tag. I was kinda wondering what happened. I did put the blp prod with the hope that the creator would add more. EvergreenFir (talk) 07:15, 17 November 2019 (UTC)