User talk:LindsayH/Archive5

Missing information regarding 1979 Tulane Green Wave football players who played in NFL

Hi Lindsay tried to update info on Wikipedia and really sucked at it. I am Nolan Franz. I played on 1979 Liberty Bowl Team as wide receiver. At time I was a sophomore. I signed as FA in 1981 with Buffalo Bills. I played in USFL as NFL with Greenbay Packers in 1986. Research it and maybe you could edit it to be more accurate. Two years later in 1981 I led the team in receptions and we were 6-5. My last game at Tulane we beat our arch rival, LSU 48-7. Can't undue history. :) Nolanfranz (talk) 23:27, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting my RfA

	Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey, Hawkeye7, you're welcome. No matter what the 'crats decide (or decided, it's some time since i looked at the chat Avi started), may i just say that i admire the restraint you showed during the course of the RfA. Lots of people were saying things that can't have been good to read about yourself, but you showed a great deal of dignity and classiness in your responses; cheers, Lindsay^Hello 21:22, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited M5 motorway (Pakistan), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ahmedpur and Daur. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Edit to Cyclopia page

Hi LindsayH. You reverted the page to say "1 in 250 in embryos" are affected with cyclopia. That seems ridiculous to me since we are all from embryos, so 1 in 250 people would be cyclopic. I edited it to accurately say (as it says in other sources) "one in ~250 miscarried fetuses". This was rejected, I think quite incorrectly. I have re-edited this page and added a source also and changed the number to 200 since that's what Leroi says. Cheers and thanks for helping make wikipedia great. - JH — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jiuk (talk • contribs) 22:01, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, Jiuk, i've taken another look, and you are quite correct: I was in error. My apologies, and thank you for following up and correcting me. I was tracking IP edits at the time, so the fact that you were not signed in is what led me to (a) see your edit and (b) wrongly view it as vandalism: The benefits of being signed in, eh? Thanks; cheers, Lindsay^Hello 08:07, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Family tree of Muhammad

An article that you have been involved in editing—Family tree of Muhammad —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. 89.240.87.162 (talk) 20:11, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Ancestry of Muhammad

An article that you have been involved in editing—Ancestry of Muhammad —has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. 89.240.87.162 (talk) 20:12, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Lajitas, Texas

Hi there. I reverted your edit, then noticed yours was also a revert, so I reverted to the last clean version. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:30, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Beverly Gray cleanup

Hi, thanks for cleaning up the errors in the Beverly Gray page! One minor note: In the Plagiarism section, you changed "Indeed it does" to "Indeed, it does." The edit makes sense, except that the part changed was part of a quotation from Beverly Gray at the World's Fair, and in the book it the phrase appears without a comma. Worth keeping in mind for future edits, but anyways, thanks again for your work. --Usernameunique (talk • contribs) 09:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Usernameunique ~ fair enough, it does; i missed that. I would point that out, if i were you, with {{sic}} or some such mechanism so another doesn't make the same error i did. Also, are you aware of signing your talk page posts? If you use ~~~~ the magic of wiki will sign and date your comment; cheers, Lindsay^Hello 15:21, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

LindsayH Cool, thanks for the info! Usernameunique (talk) 21:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you very much for your Welcome message on 19 December 2015. Sorry for being Late for your appreciation, I truly appreciate your services to Wikipedia and helping me learn the ways in which an Article should be created. Once again Thank you Very much. Muhammadahmad79 (talk) 11:25, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Random order given

stop removeing my bbc choice text don't touch it again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stick lizard 2 (talk • contribs) 14:20, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Preceeding moved here and given a header from the spot it was left. Lindsay^Hello Please stop removing my pages — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stick lizard 2 (talk • contribs) 09:55, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Edison Blue Amberol Records: Popular Series, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elizabeth Spencer. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Glarus Sud

Hi. You edited the article Glarus Sud with the comment Repair CS1 error(s), replaced: work=KGS Inventar → work= KGS Inventar using AWB. You did make the change described in the comment, but you also unlinked a number of links in the history section. I'm not sure why, as you unlinked some previous municipality names but not others in the same paragraph, and there doesn't seem to be anything that connects the ones that are unlinked and/or distinguishes the ones that are not. Given the lack of an explicit or obvious explanation, I rather assume an accidental mis-edit. I've therefore reinstated the links. If this wasn't accidental please feel free to repeat with explanatory comment. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 12:54, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Chris j wood, hi there. Yes, i did unlink some names; generally, while using AWB, i'll remove words that have three or more links (i.e., i'll remove links down to two); my usual practice is not to count (or unlink) those in templates or image captions, and leave the first in the article, as the earlier a link is made the better for the reader, i reckon. The only general exception is if a fairly simple word is linked more than once i'll remove all but the first ~ in the Swiss articles i've been doing, for example, Hamlet (place) is linked quite frequently, as is Parish, and i have unlinked quite a few of them.

Quite true, i don't explain that in the edit summary; on the other hand, there are other, essentially silent, changes made, too, such as replacement of templates, removal of whitespace, &c., which also do not receive a mention in the summary. I won't replace the removal (hmm, that's a poor construction), reverting your reinstatement, but i shall probably continue removing links, barring a change to OVERLINK or further objection. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 13:10, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

In fact, as you can see here, i have added a note to the edit summary; hope this helps! Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 13:23, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

I did wonder if this was an OVERLINKing issue, but as all the places in the history paragraph were also linked in the lead paragraph, and you only unlinked some of them, that didn't seem to make sense. I'm in too minds about whether this is overlinking or not; the lead para refers to a list of places within the current municipality, whilst the history para refers to a list of former municipalities that were merged to create it. Conceptually different things that could have separate articles, but, as it happens, don't in this case. However the reader isn't to know that, so does (s)he perceive it as overlinking or not. Hum. Needs a ponder, I think. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 14:23, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United States Senate election in Tennessee, 2014, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Minister. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

AWB and removing urls in published

Please do not remove urls from publishers with AWB as you did here there is on consensus that that this is the correct course of action. This was a change to the template made by a few editors without any input from the wider community. This is a classic example of why such a link is desirable, because it allows an editor to link to a page that shows that the website is not a reliable one. -- PBS (talk) 11:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi PBS, thanks for your message. I looked at discussion prior to starting the task of removing the weblink from parameters in the CS1 templates, and have had another look after your message. I have to say that i respectfully disagree; from what i have read there is general agreement that this is the correct course of action, and you alone disagree. That being the case, i will continue to remove the urls from those parameters which generate the red CS1 error messages. Obviously, if you are able to point me to a larger, more recent discussion in which the general consensus is for the presence of the url i shall stop. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 09:05, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Track listing / level 1 header

Hi, I noticed a couple of your edits to the "Track listing" header on some album pages. Is there a particular reason why you made them Level 1 headers? I don't think that's the correct protocol. Maybe it was a mistake on your end? Thanks --Jennica✿ / ^talk 01:11, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jennica; feel free to correct me, if i'm wrong but, assuming you're talking about such pages as Abrázame y Bésame (Jennifer Peña album), which i edited yesterday with my Kahtar account, i think you'll find that i made the headers to the correct level (two "=" at each end), and an IP editor has changed them to the higher, never used, level (one "=" at each end). If you think i was incorrect to use the level 1 heading as i did, i refer you to the appropriate section of the MOS, which shows the preferred organisation. If i have completely misunderstood what you are saying, as i say above, please feel free to correct me! Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 09:10, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Ohh Ok. It was my mistake. I guess it must have been late at night -- cause I swear I thought I saw it another way. I'm sorry for the mistake! Happy Holidays --Jennica✿ / ^talk 16:22, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Waiting for your comments at my talk page

--Regards 182.75.175.230 (talk) 14:01, 28 December 2016 (UTC) (Have a look at my talk page please ) --182.75.175.230 (talk) 14:08, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Britain and the capital city of London that England does not belong to London

But excuse football English real and Tottenham, Chelsea, Arsenal, West Ham are English fractions the term british and entrusted to the teams of the capital city of London I have the great London has nothing to do the English word does not interest a British accidents are outside the capital, the London british are to the interior of London city are several things are distinguishable from others. --82.54.2.148 (talk) 16:54, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hello LindsayH. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog (around 15,000 pages) down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. -- Samtar ^{talk · contribs} 13:36, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter No.2

Hello LindsayH,

A HUGE backlog

We now have 806 New Page Reviewers!
Most of us requested the user right at PERM, expressing a wish to be able to do something about the huge backlog, but the chart on the right does not demonstrate any changes to the pre-user-right levels of October.

Hitting 17,000 soon

The backlog is still steadily growing at a rate of 150 a day or 4,650 a month. Only 20 reviews a day by each reviewer over the next few days would bring the backlog down to a managable level and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
It didn't work in time to relax for the Xmas/New Year holidays. Let's see if we can achieve our goal before Easter, otherwise by Thanksgiving it will be closer to 70,000.

Second set of eyes

Remember that we are the only guardians of quality of new articles, we alone have to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged by non-Reviewer patrollers and that new authors are not being bitten.

Abuse

This is even more important and extra vigilance is required considering Orangemoody, and

1. this very recent case of paid advertising by a Reviewer resulting in a community ban.
2. this case in January of paid advertising by a Reviewer, also resulting in a community ban.
3. This Reviewer is indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry.

Coordinator election

Kudpung is stepping down after 6 years as unofficial coordinator of New Page Patrolling/Reviewing. There is enough work for two people and two coords are now required. Details are at NPR Coordinators; nominate someone or nominate yourself. Date for the actual suffrage will be published later.

---

Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list

New Page Review-Patrolling: Coordinator elections

Your last chance to nominate yourself or any New Page Reviewer, See Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Coordination. Elections begin Monday 20 February 23:59 UTC. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter No.3

Hello LindsayH,

Voting for coordinators has now begun HERE and will continue through/to 23:59 UTC Monday 06 March. Please be sure to vote. Any registered, confirmed editor can vote. Nominations are now closed.

Still a MASSIVE backlog

We now have 806 New Page Reviewers but despite numerous appeals for help, the backlog has NOT been significantly reduced.
If you asked for the New Page Reviewer right, please consider investing a bit of time - every little helps preventing spam and trash entering the mainspace and Google when the 'NO_INDEX' tags expire.

---

Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Abigail Keam, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romance. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	thanks for your help, if you have any advice to offer, I would appreciate criticism, comment, or any advice on my talk page about barbwires, thanks ZzeonBlue ZzeonBlue (talk) 18:04, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Keep up the great work!

		The WikiHaggis
		I hereby award you the WikiHaggis! This means you are slightly nutty, sorta spicy, and maybe resemble stuffed pig intestines. Pass this WikiHaggis on by putting {{subst:WikiHaggis}} on someones talk page!

Thank You!

Thank you for the corrections you made on Marshall Neal's biographical article! I'm new here, learning my way around (trail & error) and it is my first article. I appreciate any help received! 😃

Unique freaq (talk) 14:34, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4

Hello LindsayH,

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 806 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:43, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello LindsayH, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
• Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

• Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
• The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:
  • User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js adds a link to the new pages feed and page curation toolbar to your top toolbar on Wikipedia
  • User:The Earwig/copyvios.js adds a link in your side toolbox that will run the current page through

General project update:

• Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers, Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Noticeboard has been marked as historical. Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers is currently the most active central discussion forum for the New Page Patrol project. To keep up to date on the most recent discussions you can add it to your watchlist or visit it periodically.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Actually

These words are not made up. Can you tell me which one is? And you didn't revert some. You reverted all of my edits. 92.6.181.11 (talk) 09:37, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Incestuous is the correct word; incestual is incorrect. Sibcestual does not seem to exist. Twincest may, but is not common, nor necessary. So please, adhere to the norms, both of Wikipedia and of English. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 09:41, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

However, incest is more of a legal term compared to the others. A legal term is not appropriate imo on an page of historical note where such legal issues didn't exist. Nor is it appripriate in a novel-like scene wherein there are no law-related storylines. Any comment on that? 92.6.181.11 (talk) 09:45, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Irrelevant, i'm afraid, if it is the correct term. Sibcest is not a real word ~ did you just make it up? Twincest, though in a small amount of use, appears to be a neologism; i left it in one of the places you inserted it, because you did at least wlink to it. As for a "legal term" in plots, it really doesn't matter ~ and incest isn't a legal term, anyway, any more than rape is or theft: They are each correct, common words which have use in the legal profession. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 09:51, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

If you actually speak to a lexicographer, they'd tell you any word that is in usage beyond the original coiner is a word. Sibcest, twincest and incestual are all in usage beyond their original coiners. Rare/uncommon words are not banned on wikipedia. Seems like you're making up wikipedia rules as you go along. 92.6.181.11 (talk) 09:53, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

My intention with my edits was to delineate nuance in different contexts, rather than a the blanket term "incest". Wikipedia was designed for readers and I imagine some other readers would prefer nuance and delineation rather than blanket/sweeping and judgemental terminology. Can we come to some sort of compromise wherein you'd self-revert at least some of your reverts? 92.6.181.11 (talk) 09:56, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:39, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

The comment by an editor on your user page

Hi, LindsayH. Are you aware of this? Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:43, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Yup, thank you. It seemed fairly harmless, so i didn't do anything; the user in question hasn't edited in five months or so. I expect i'll remove it eventually. Thanks. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 17:09, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Linda, boss would work as well. Very nice introduction and it gave me some insight into thinking about my own talk page and I may provide a bit of insight later after I complete other tasks and have some time. Good reading for those who see LindsayH on their pages and contributions! Thanks! Ed ZzeonBlue (talk) 21:41, 13 March 2017 (UTC)ZzeonBlue (Moved from my user page; this is what Flyer22 refers to above. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 08:33, 30 September 2017 (UTC))

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello LindsayH, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

• Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
• Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello LindsayH, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

• The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

• On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
• Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Lindsay, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! Though I must add that it is actually now impossible to delete the main page, so I couldn't even if I wanted to. :) ansh666 20:59, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello LindsayH, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

• Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:

• The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Nero Julius Caesar

The article states he was the "adopted son" of Tiberius. This seems inaccurate as it was his father who was Tiberius' adopted son, making Nero his adoptive grandson not unlike how Caligula was related to Tiberius. I'm not aware of any source stating that Tiberius adopted his late adopted son's sons, but rather elevated his adoptive grandsons (Nero and Drusus) the way he would later with their younger brother Caligula. 2601:18D:681:19AE:5885:C124:ABAB:4C02 (talk) 14:33, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi

I have expanded the article about Rikard Wolff. A very well known Swedish singer who sadly died today. Could you please take a look at that article. Any help is appreciated. Cheers.BabbaQ (talk) 14:44, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi BabbaQ; i see you've done a lot of work, as has another user. I took a quick look, and just made two small changes. Possibly portions of the article still are a little awkward (there's one entire section, for example, in which every sentence begins with In), but as a whole it seems fine. Happy days, Lindsay^Hello 17:32, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello LindsayH, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
• Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

• If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

• A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

• ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
• The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello LindsayH, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1^st and run until January 29^th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

• The total number of reviews completed for the month.
• The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)