This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. Thank you for your work on J.J. Wright (composer). User:Onel5969, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Very nice job on the article.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:24, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

definitely the best article i've ever read about a toll highway in madagascar. theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) (she/her) 23:26, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

? — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 00:00, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Onel! — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 00:00, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

On the Matthew's page I used c/e because I was initially changing lead to led, which looked like an oversight. Human rights activist to political activist seemed correct because he advocates against human rights, not for them, causing to the lede to be subtly misleading Very Average Editor ( talk) 18:31, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey @ Red-tailed hawk,

This story was recently published on Medium. Have a look at it.

I think this is relevant to the ongoing RfC on Reliability Noticeboard, especially when it seems that they have strong political bias and are willing to violate journalistic morals to pursue a story.

Let me know if it is worth putting out there. SpunkyGeek ( talk) 00:13, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello. You left a note on the history page of this article stating that content has been copied from the article on the 88th Rifle Division (Soviet Union). Attribution is to myself, as I am the lead editor of the 88th RD. I had previously copied the same content to the article on the 239th Rifle Division, of which I am also the lead editor. Wreck Smurfy ( talk) 01:24, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. I added the attribution note on a precautionary basis because other editors have made small edits to the section relating to Rzhev; that section was the one I saw that was copied from between the two articles. It's unclear to me if they also would need attribution (their contributions are small), but it doesn't appear to cause any harm to add the notes in the case that they do. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 01:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk,

Thank you for adding your careful point-by-point documentation of the socking going on among these editors. I knew they were all socks but I think your careful analysis really was convincing to any checkuser reviewing the case. Thanks for looking so deeply into what what was happening when. I spend a lot of time these days reviewing daily AFD logs and I was really surprised to run into as much socking as I see. Fortunately, much of it is caught early but I also know that there have been AFDs that were closed based only on sockpuppet votes and I wonder sometimes if we should dig them up and review them once the socking is uncovered. Thanks again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:42, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Liz, thank you so much for writing these kind words. I do share your worry about AfDs that were closed solely about sockpuppet !votes, and I think that digging up a list would probably be beneficial to the project—especially if the sock farms are associated with UPE. We could do this by hand, though it will be time-consuming. I'm not exactly sure how to go about creating this list database query-wise, though it would probably be really helpful to the project. Pinging @ JPxG:, who runs the Oracle for Deletion, to ask for pointers on querying deletion discussions en masse. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 07:06, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello Red-tailed hawk,

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 04, 2023, which is when the first evidence phase closes. Submitted evidence will be summarized by Arbitrators and Clerks at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Evidence/Summary. Owing to the summary style, editors are encouraged to submit evidence in small chunks sooner rather than more complete evidence later.

Details about the summary page, the two phases of evidence, a timeline and other answers to frequently asked questions can be found at the case's FAQ page.

For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree ( talk) 00:14, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi Red-tailed hawk. Could you please stop creating FfD discussions for PD files that are obviously incorrectly tagged as non-free? Many of these are obvious errors and do not require a discussion. Moving forward, when you encounter such files, please be bold and make the necessary corrections to their licensing information; this is a Wiki after all. Thanks, FASTILY 03:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good; it had been my understanding that those things should generally go to FfD, but I'll just go and change the more obvious ones going forward. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 03:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

FfD is only necessary if there's a dispute (i.e. someone reverts your edit, but you still believe you are correct after discussing with them). - FASTILY 04:02, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you for clearing this up for me. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 04:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Precious

One year!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

I've quoted you in my recent evidence statement at ArbCom here. Due to word limitations, I only quoted a part of your statement. I hope it is ok with you. If you think I am misquoting you or that I misunderstood your point, please let me know and I'll refactor what I wrote or strike the quote out. As someone subject to being misquoted, I certainly don't want to do it myself to anyone. (To be clear, you are not a party and you are in no danger of being sanctioned for anything). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:54, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

@ Piotrus: Thank you for the note. It's mostly proper quotation (the evidence proffered in support of concluding that there's some sort of EEML2 is extremely weak), though there's a bit of nuance missed with respect to how I was characterizing involvement. I stand by the statement that people should not be using off-wiki platforms to attempt to further on-wiki disputes in which they have become involved—this is a general principle about which I feel strongly. That being said, I'm not sure the extent to which that principle applies this case—Chapmansh had a very low level of on-wiki involvement in this topic area outside of interactions with her students—and this case does differ a bit from the hypothetical that I presented where the student goes to their professor for the explicit purpose of getting them to write a journal article to name and shame certain Wikipedians inasmuch as it doesn't appear that her student actually did that. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 01:10, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Certainly, I agree. In fact her case is relatively rare - most academics don't engage with Wikipedia at all (which is unfortunate). What I think needs addressing, by the community, is the question of what can we do when generally reliable outside sources (media, either news or scholarly) do stuff like casting aspertions, personal attacks and arguably, harassment. In most cases we won't even have an on-wiki party (since, again, most of those individuals don't have Wikipedia accounts). But what should we do when they do but are mostly inactive? And what should we do if they don't? How can we support the volunteers who are dealing with off-wiki negative press, particulalry if said negative press is based on weak evidence? Lack of support for volunteers who are suffering from stress due to wiki-related conflicts (on- and off-wiki) is major reason for people burning out and leaving the project. (I published academic research about this...). IMHO, WMF needs to have salaried staff whose job is to help people. We have Trust & Safety, but that's not enough. IMHO we need councelors and advocates, available for consulations with members of community. Perhaps this is something to suggest at WP:VPWMF? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:37, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

On 30 March 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article O Emmanuel (album), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that J.J. Wright fused Gregorian chant with jazz in his advent album O Emmanuel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/O Emmanuel (album). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, O Emmanuel (album)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Aoidh ( talk) 00:03, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

On 30 March 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article J.J. Wright (composer), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that J.J. Wright fused Gregorian chant with jazz in his advent album O Emmanuel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/O Emmanuel (album). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, J.J. Wright (composer)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Aoidh ( talk) 00:03, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Apologies if this isn't the correct channel for this. I'm just getting started with editing, and I've just seen that you are the creator and one of the editors responsible for protecting the Uyghur Genocide article. Thank you so much for starting it and upkeeping such an important archive of information. I'm so glad it's been protected.

I just wanted to reach out regarding the 'Uyghur identity' section with a quick suggestion:

As the page cites the targets as 'Uyghurs, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz, and other Turkic Muslims', a mention and explanation of Turkic peoples and targets other than Uyghurs could be helpful to readers in order to highlight the explicit ethnic drive behind the genocide. This document also has a lot of fantastic articles for citation, if you haven't seen it yet. The wiki as is is incredibly in depth and a great resource, but I think the casual reader might not understand the connection between targets off the bat, which makes genocide denialism easier. I would add it myself, but I don't have the necessary credentials.

Thank you again! I've also seen you protect other pages against CCP rhetoric, and I very much appreciate it.

Best ~ Dsrlisan85 ( talk) 02:57, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

On 3 April 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Parker House (Sea Girt, New Jersey), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after Sea Girt, New Jersey, passed a law that banned live rock and disco music at the Parker House (pictured), a state judge overturned the ban as being "silly"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Parker House (Sea Girt, New Jersey). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Parker House (Sea Girt, New Jersey)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Aoidh ( talk) 00:02, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Wonderful job on the Parker House! I thought you might be interested in the Monmouth Hotel. It was only a short walk from the Parker House. Best, Thriley ( talk) 01:17, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing me to this draft! I'll have to do a bit of looking into that history (I'm not as familiar with it), but it is something I'd be interested in working on. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 01:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Mimetic Capital".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:44, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
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) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

On 26 April 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Antananarivo–Toamasina toll highway, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 2022 an Egyptian company was awarded the contract to build the first toll highway in Madagascar? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Antananarivo–Toamasina toll highway. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Antananarivo–Toamasina toll highway), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Aoidh ( talk) 12:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

I changed the tagging to speedy delete. Best regards. ✍A.WagnerC ( talk) 01:01, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

The second round of the 2023 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to have scored 60 points to advance into round 3. Our top five scorers in round 2 all included a featured article among their submissions and each scored over 500 points. They were:

• Iazyges (1040) with three FAs on Byzantine emperors, and lots of bonus points.
• Unlimitedlead (847), with three FAs on ancient history, one GA and nine reviews.
• Epicgenius (636), a WikiCup veteran, with one FA on the New Amsterdam Theatre, four GAs and eleven DYKs
• BennyOnTheLoose (553), a seasoned competitor, with one FA on snooker, six GAs and seven reviews.
• FrB.TG (525), with one FA, a Lady Gaga song and a mass of bonus points.

Other notable performances were put in by Sammi Brie, Thebiguglyalien, MyCatIsAChonk, PCN02WPS, and AirshipJungleman29.

So far contestants have achieved thirteen featured articles between them, one being a joint effort, and forty-nine good articles. The judges are pleased with the thorough reviews that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 08:15, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:School of Cork, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 18:01, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, @ Red-tailed hawk. I'm here to tell that I have reverted your redirect on the page Minor-attracted person (which directed it to a section of the Chronophilia page). Upon seeing the page's history, I have seen that you blanked it under the justification " WP:BLAR. If anywhere on the encyclopedia, there, but I don't think this has improved since the last time this went to AfD". My decision was based on the same policy as you cited, which states that "If other editors disagree with this blanking, its contents can be recovered from page history."

The reason for the revert are two:

a) The content of that page is too controversial for it to be (effectivelly) removed by a monocratic decision coming from a single user (even if he is an admin). Consensus is needed here, as well as a previous discussion about the page before any major decision is made.

b) The content of the page now is substantially different from what it was before November 2021. Since you are an admin, I assume you will be able to see how the prevous page was (it was a little dab with three paragraphs, as opposed to the current article that is almost 25k bytes long). If you can't, use the Wayback Machine, there is an archive of March 2021 there.

If you feel strongly about that article, I really recommend that you take it to AFD. As WP:BLAR says, "If editors cannot agree, the content issues should be discussed at the relevant talk page, and other methods of dispute resolution should be used, such as restoring the article and nominating the article for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion."" You would make a good nom, since you were here in the 2021's discussion. 🔥 22spears 🔥 02:42, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

With all due respect, the vast majority of the literature cited in that article are nothing short of totally and utterly WP:FRINGE. The notion that we should be citing critical criminology literature whose main thrust is that Pedophilia is a form of sexual orientation just as being gay is, as you introduced to the article in this edit to the draft that was later incorporated into the live article here, is emblematic of the deep, deep problems with the article's sourcing. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 03:12, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi there. I almost missed your reply because you didn't @ me, no notification was emitted. I will @ you here just to be sure that you don't miss this reply. @ Red-tailed hawk.

"the vast majority of the literature cited in that article are nothing short of totally and utterly WP:FRINGE."

At least 90% of the sources being currrently used in that article were either published on peer-reviewed journals or are WP:GREL sources (AFP, Newsweek, etc). You can check the source eval in the talk page, or consult the source list on the body of the article if you want to see the most recent sources as well. Another detail is that most of those academic sources were also published by academic journals that are reputable among scientific fields relating to child sexual abuse, such as Archives of Sexual Behavior and Journal of Child Sexual Abuse. Also, those journals are specialized on this topic, which makes them more reliable for an article like this.

Besides, as far as I understand, it is not up to us Wikipedians to decide what is fringe and what is not, especially when reliable sources do not say that the use of this term is fringe but instead treat it as just another term to refer to people who have chronophilias relating to minors. If reliable sources say X and we say Y, odds are we are the science deniers, which is fine, we all disagree with the experts in one issue or another, but for the purposes of Wikipedia we should place the most reliable sources first. I used to think that this term was WP:Fringe as well, but I changed my mind after researching it on Google Scholar and other search engines. I even tried to find sources that said that this term was fringe, but I found nothing except for TERF and alternative media blogs (such as 4W, the Post Millenial, some creationist websites, etc), this is why this article doesn't give prominence to the idea that MAP is a term that was made to legalize child rape or anything like that.

"The notion that we should be citing critical criminology literature whose main thrust is that Pedophilia is a form of sexual orientation just as being gay is, as you introduced to the article in this edit to the draft that was later incorporated into the live article here, is emblematic of the deep, deep problems with the article's sourcing"

This source was used only once in the article, and it's being used to support another source (the research by Sara Jahnke). We could remove that source right now and the content of the article would remain the exact same thing, that's how insignificant it is.

I also don't like Critical Criminology, though for different reasons, which is why I barely used it in the article. The idea that pedophilia is a sexual orientation is fringe for sure, and I have seen reliable source criticizing Michael Seto for saying that pedophilia was an age-based form of sexual orientation, but we did not use that source to make that statement. 🔥 22spears 🔥 04:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Economics of taxation in the United States".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I see that you have redirected the article on The Lever. Did you look at the talk page for this article before redirecting? I clarified the sources for the article on that page. I believe that the article was well-sourced. Can you please explain your thinking on the redirect? Thank you. Dorje108 ( talk) 01:24, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I looked at the talk page and sources. First-person interviews are non-independent sources, and do not contribute towards WP:SIRS. Moreover, WP:INHERITORG explicitly notes that An organization is not notable merely because a notable person or event was associated with it, and coverage merely of an employee of an organization isn't actually coverage of that organization. With respect to the Izzy Award, it appears to be a minor award by a small private college in upstate New York; it's not the sort of thing like a Canadian National Newspaper Award or a Pulitzer prize that would make an earner notable under WP:ANYBIO#1, much less make a company notable. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 01:34, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the prompt response. I am really trying to understand, so I have some follow-up questions.

• Regarding the Izzy Award, it seems to me the criteria is should be "is this a reliable secondary source?" So in your view, is the institution granting the award a reliable source? Granted it is not a Pulitzer Prize, but the Roy H. Park School of Communications (the institution that grants the award) "has been named a top school for film, journalism, media, and entertainment by Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, The Princeton Review and more." (per the Wikipedia page) So clearly this institution has a good reputation within its field.
• Regarding "First-person interviews are non-independent sources..." - are you referring to the multiple instances when reporters from The Lever are interviewed by other news outlets? In these cases, the reporters are discussing their reporting for The Lever. That seems significant to me. Am I missing something here?

Thanks you for helping me to understand this process. Regards, Dorje108 ( talk) 02:18, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

With respect to your first bullet point, this article is a Press Release from IC that contains a listing of winners of the awards that it issues. WP:ORGSIG states explicitly that a listing of award recipients is an example of trivial coverage (i.e. not significant coverage).

With respect to your second bullet point—no, you are not missing something; first-person interviews and direct quotes from non-independent persons are not considered independent coverage because the content itself is non-independent. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 02:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

The article for the Izzy Award states:

The Lever is a reader-supported investigative news outlet that holds accountable the people and corporations manipulating the levers of power. Its reporting, podcasts, videos, and live events focus on politics, business and corruption — and how money shapes and distorts economic and environmental policy.

A four-part series published last year by Andrew Perez of The Lever in partnership with ProPublica, titled “Inside The Right’s Historic Billion-Dollar Dark Money Transfer,” followed the money behind the architect of the conservative supermajority in the Supreme Court, Leonard Leo. The investigation exposed Chicago businessman Barre Seid’s $1.6 billion donation to Leo’s political advocacy nonprofit in the largest known dark money transfer in history.

The judges commented: “No news outlet is as thorough and relentless as The Lever in exposing the corrupting influence of corporate power on government and both major parties. From dark money influence on the Supreme Court to Medicare privatization to the dangers of deregulation to other topics, The Lever‘s investigative team is on the corruption beat day after day. Led by 2015 Izzy Award winner David Sirota, The Lever is nonpartisan and subscriber funded, just like I.F. Stone’s Weekly.”

This seems to be notable praise from a reliable source. I find it hard to imagine how this could be considered trivial?

Regarding the second point, I do not understand the term "non-independent persons." Can you give an example here? Thank you. Dorje108 ( talk) 03:01, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

My point with the Izzy Award is that it is a press release and is also coverage that is excluded from meeting WP:SIRS under the text of WP:ORGSIG.

Non-independent persons, in line with WP:ORGIND, are people who are not unrelated people with no vested interest in the subject. Some examples of people who are related to a company may include an owner of a company, a director or officer of a company, an employee of a company, a sufficiently close family member of any of the aforementioned classes of people, et cetera; I can't give an exhaustive list, but generally people who work for a firm can't actually be the ones whose writings make a firm warrant an article. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 03:10, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the follow-up. Much appreciated. I need to digest these points. Best regards, Dorje108 ( talk) 03:21, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Red-tailed hawk,

I still have questions from yesterday's discussion, however for today I would like to focus on notability.

The guidelines on notability for "web content" ( WP:WEB) state:

"When evaluating the notability of web content, please consider whether it has had any significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education." WP:INHERENTWEB

Regarding The Lever, I have found additional citations that help to demonstrate that The Lever meets this criteria.

The new citations (tweets and a press release from members of Congress) are:

• Congressman Ro Khanna (CA) retweets and comments on a post from The Lever regarding the dark money influence on the Supreme Court: https://twitter.com/RoKhanna/status/1655928323338391552
• Ro Khanna cites The Lever reporting on bank lobbying: https://twitter.com/RoKhanna/status/1635459053349482498
• Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) cites The Lever reporting on dark money: https://twitter.com/SenWhitehouse/status/1540803957953466368
• Congressman Chris Deluzio (PA) ties The Lever's reporting to legislative action: https://deluzio.house.gov/media/press-releases/following-disastrous-train-derailment-east-palestine-deluzio-khanna-introduce ("Reporting by The Lever News has shown how rail regulations have been weakened and rolled back over the past years and helped raise awareness in the immediate aftermath of the East Palestine derailment.")

The above statements demonstrate that The Lever reporting is deemed notable by multiple members of Congress, from California to Pennsylvania. And that this reporting is influencing their decision-making.

Also, as shown here, The Lever's reporting has been cited repeatedly in news outlets such as the New York Times, The Guardian, HuffPost, and other outlets. This demonstrates ongoing media coverage focusing on a product or organization. WP:ORG

In addition, reporters from The Lever have appeared on multiple platforms to discuss the stories that they are reporting on. These platforms include:

• The Problem with Jon Stewart, - " The Ohio Train Disaster: A Tale of Corporate Greed and Civil War-Era Brakes", The Problem with Jon Stewart
• Democracy Now! - " Corporate Greed and Deregulation Fuel Threat of More Bomb Trains as East Palestine Demands Answers", Democracy Now, Feb 17, 2023
• On The Media - " An Ohio Train Derailment Reveals Structural Issues", On The Media, Feb 17, 2023
• The Hill - https://twitter.com/HillTVLive/status/1658180635217780760
• Etc.

This also demonstrates ongoing media coverage. And that The Lever reporting is influencing the news coverage of other news outlets. (This is indeed the stated goal of The Lever.)

Clearly, all of the above references show that The Lever is having significant and demonstrable effects on culture and society. Do you agree with this? - Dorje108 ( talk) 03:06, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

None of this is WP:SIRS—particularly so for the tweets and press releases. I don't really think that there is much more to say. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 03:30, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

You don't see ongoing media coverage focusing on a product or organization? Dorje108 ( talk) 03:35, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

I do not see significant coverage from multiple independent reliable sources. This was a WP:BLAR, so you are free to simply undo it, but I will likely take this to AfD if you do. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 03:39, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Can you please be more specific? I really want to understand your concerns as precisely as possible, so that I can try to address them.

This is why I am asking about "ongoing media coverage?" Because ongoing media coverage counts as "significant coverage."

So regarding the media coverage. Do you doubt that it is ongoing (because I can provide more examples)? Or do you think this coverage is not reliable? Thank you for helping with this. Dorje108 ( talk) 03:52, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

"Ongoing media coverage" is not the same as "significant coverage." If a source does not address The Lever directly and in detail, it is not significant coverage. I personally don't see any sources that pass WP:SIRS. –– FormalDude (talk) 04:03, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I was looking at the third bullet point here: Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Examples_of_substantial_coverage. "Ongoing media coverage" is listed as an example of "significant." It is not clear precisely what that means though. Dorje108 ( talk) 04:15, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

That was the second bullet point in the link above. Dorje108 ( talk) 04:34, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi there. I refer to your question here: [1]. If you'd like an answer to your question, please have a look at MOS:SUICIDE. The term "committed suicide" isn't explicitly banned on wikipedia, though it is noted many people discourage its use as it can be considered stigmatising, and many neutral alternative wordings are suggested. If you'd like to know more about why "committed suicide" is problematic, I recommend this external source: [2]. I'm not going to contest your reversion as I'm not looking for ongoing disputes, though if you would consider doing so obviously I'd appreciate it. In any case, have a nice day. Damien Linnane ( talk) 02:17, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

I will point you to the relevant RfC, where the closer wrote I would urge editors not to tendentiously remove "commit suicide" everywhere it is found and explicitly notes that a minority of editors think "commit suicide" is archaic. The phrase "committed suicide" is plain English, and I see no need to change it to alternative constructions in that article. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 03:06, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for making me aware of the RfC, and your viewpoint. I'm immediately reminded of several other terms that were considered "plain English" for decades, that are now considered too inappropriate to use; I'm old enough to remember what used to be the plain English term for people with Cerebral palsy, for instance. But I understand I'll likely have to wait sometime before "committed suicide" also becomes as widely unacceptable as I wish it was now. Best wishes. Damien Linnane ( talk) 07:07, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:CT55555 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate Red-tailed hawk. They started their article creation activities with Uyghur genocide in 2019. Consider that! A genocide was occurring and wikipedia did not have an article about it. Thanks to RTH, about 2,000 people a day are better informed. RTH has since continued to create articles about vital social issues ( link) and has a propensity to write longer, well-crafted and detailed articles. About a third are A/B/C class. I had the good fortune to be collaborating with RTH on creating Igor Mangushev. They were exceptionally cooperative and we collaboratively built an article from about 4kb to about 15kb in about 48 hours. I frequently see RTH making positive suggestions as a copyright clerk at AFD, and improving articles started by others. As the barnstars at User:Red-tailed_hawk indicate, I am not alone in noticing a pattern of diplomacy, kindness, helpful editing and making difficult closes. This nomination was seconded by theleekycauldron who agreed that RTH is a fantastic editor, utterly reasonable, methodical and a pleasure to work with.

. You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}

Red-tailed hawk

Editor of the Week for the week beginning June 4, 2023

Red-tailed hawk is reasonable, methodical and a pleasure to work with. RTH continues to create detailed articles about vital social issues with about a third achieving A/B/C class. RTH is exceptionally cooperative and collaborative, making positive contributions as a AFD copyright clerk. Displays diplomacy, kindness and helpful editing .

Recognized for

being easy to work with

Notable work

Started article creation activities with Uyghur genocide in 2019

Submit a nomination

Thanks again for your efforts! ― Buster7  ☎ 19:49, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Way to go! Firefangledfeathers ( talk / contribs) 20:07, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 20:08, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

On 3 June 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Messenger (website), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the editorial staff of online news startup The Messenger includes former editors-in-chief of Gizmodo, Entertainment Weekly, People, and Self? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Messenger (website). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, The Messenger (website)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

-- RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

On 10 June 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Ted Kaczynski, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Cheers, atque supra! Fake scientist 8000 14:55, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Grand Theft Auto: Salil al-Sawarim, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 21:03, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Amy DeGise, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 19:02, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Politics of Hudson County, New Jersey, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 00:01, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello Red-tailed hawk,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

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

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I was looking at the history and saw what you did. Would have made it easier for me just now if you hadn't, but the article has been moved back, so I need someone to make sure there weren't any problems created.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:01, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

The third round of the 2023 WikiCup has come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 175 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Thebiguglyalien, with 919 points from a featured article on Frances Cleveland as well as five good articles and many reviews,
• Unlimitedlead, with 862 points from a high-scoring featured articles on Henry II of England and numerous reviews,
• Iazyges, with 560 points from a high-scoring featured article on Tiberius III.

Contestants achieved 11 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 47 good articles, 72 featured or good article reviews, over 100 DYKs and 40 ITN appearances. As always, any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk). MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:18, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

I have closed your request at WP:EFN as successful. Please make sure to have good account security, review WP:AF, etc.

By the way, you should consider this. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 19:43, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox company on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 03:59, 21 July 2023 (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.

- 🔥 𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 03:59, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 4, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/SmallCat dispute/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 13:04, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

RTH - I want to thank you for the piece of evidence regarding the ANI case I'd opened against her back in October. That wasn't a fun time. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:02, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Politics of Hudson County".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:07, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. ( t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Since you recently participated in the Charles III requested move discussion, I thought you might like to know that there are two other discussions currently going on about other British monarch article titles here and here. Cheers. Rreagan007 ( talk) 22:21, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

On 1 August 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ben Collins (reporter), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ben Collins accepted a job with NBC News on the condition that the company also hire Brandy Zadrozny? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ben Collins (reporter). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Ben Collins (reporter)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Babatunde Akinboboye, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 04:02, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

You are a remarkable editor in many ways. You would be a good administrator, in my opinion, and appear to be well qualified. You personify an administrator without tools and have gained my support already!

Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 06:26, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

If you can close your diplomatic stuff with such skill as your userpage would suggest, then by all means go for this. –  John M Wolfson ( talk •  contribs) 20:18, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

• +1. — Compassionate727 ^{( T· C)} 21:14, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes! You are certainly one of the best editors on this site and would make an excellent administrator. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 21:21, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I echo what others said at your request for EFM. I have positive impressions of your work, and I can only imagine what you'd accomplish if you had more tools at your disposal. — Wug· a·po·des 22:53, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Agreed NW1223< Howl at me• My hunts> 22:57, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

• Thirded, fourthed, whatever count we're at now, i agree. Happy days, ~ Lindsay ^{H ello} 05:22, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

+1 ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 09:12, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

• Anyone want to click this link with me? Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 04:43, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
• +1 - 🔥 𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 02:59, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
• +1. VickKiang (talk) 09:57, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
• +1 - you'd be an excellent admin! Iamreallygoodatcheckers ^talk 00:27, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
• +1. I'm willing to support you since the evidence you provided and the encouragement you showed in PlanespotterA320/RespectCE case on meta. -Lemonaka‎ 07:28, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Nominating

Red tailed hawk, would you be willing for me (and possibly others) to nominate you for adminship? Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 02:21, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I've been deeply touched by the kind words that people have given me over the past couple of weeks. I'm taking time to consider things, and I appreciate your message. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 04:12, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok, just ping me if you want a nomination as I'm more than happy to nominate you. 🙂 Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 09:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Can I chivvy you along with the RfA nom a bit RTH? Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 07:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Sophia Pringle, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 05:02, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Pound sterling on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

The proposed decision in the SmallCat dispute has been posted. You are invited to review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 10:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC) si

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Capri Sun US and EU.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Ixfd64 ( talk) 17:10, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page 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. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. 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) 09:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of Imzadi 1979  → on 19:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, " Sophia Pringle".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:15, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello Red-tailed hawk,

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Regarding the discussion on Uyghur genocide‎, apparently I am (or was) not that familiar with the modern political history. The information (and sources) you gave are very educative. Thanks! -- Wengier ( talk) 01:23, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Happy to provide! There's honestly quite a lot to be written about the subject, though I'm finding myself recently having less time to contribute. Alas, that's how life is going at the moment; hopefully it will be better soon. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 02:01, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

I see. As you said life is surely very importantly; I also hope I have more time to contribute, although there are indeed other things for me to do in my life as well. -- Wengier ( talk) 02:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

In the page about the international reactions for the Hamas invasion of Israel you removed my reference to the Greek prime minister. If you didn't like my wording why did you remove it completely as if it never happened? Why didn't you just correct it? Ateapotist22 ( talk) 16:48, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

That was a mistake; I must have accidentally deleted the line when making edits to other sections. My apologies. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 16:50, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Restored. — Red-tailed hawk  _(nest) 16:52, 8 October 2023 (UTC)