Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Tweaks to the submission banner: must be working okay |
←Blanked the page |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WPAFC/project}}{{shortcut|WT:WPAFC|WT:AFCP}} |
|||
{{Tmbox |
|||
|image = none |
|||
|text = <big>'''Please note:''' This page is for users working on the project administration. If you would like to submit an article, please follow the "Unregistered users: Submitting an article" instructions on the [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation|project page]]. </big>}} |
|||
{{Archive box|box-width=7em| |
|||
*[[/2005]] |
|||
*[[/2006]] |
|||
*[[/2007]] |
|||
*[[/2008]] |
|||
*[[/2009]]}} |
|||
== [[Template:AFC submission]] transclusions in mainspace == |
|||
There are dozens of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&limit=500&target=Template%3AAFC+submission&namespace=0 instances] of this template in article space which need to be removed, and if applicable considered for creation. Some are included in the article when created by a new user, some others when a reviewer forgets to remove it. There is also a good number in redirects or existing articles. <strong><span style="font-family:Monotype;">[[User:Cenarium|<font color="#000080">Cenarium</font>]][[User_talk:Cenarium|<font color="#000090"> '''<sup>Talk</sup>'''</font>]]</span></strong> 02:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Well, I am confused. I looked at some of the articles where the template is transcluded. [[One and Only]], for example, says that {{t1|AFC submission}} is transcluded there. When you click "edit", you can ''see'' the template. But when you view the article, it's not there. Can anyone help clear this up for me? <b><font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font>‑<font color="darkblue"><big><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></big></font>-<font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font></b> 03:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::The template uses [[template:namespace detect]]. If the template is in an article, it doesn't show up. There's also [[Articles for creation/Submissions/Al Marakeb Boat Manufacturing Company]] which needs review, the prefix Wikipedia: isn't there so it's in mainspace. <strong><span style="font-family:Monotype;">[[User:Cenarium|<font color="#000080">Cenarium</font>]][[User_talk:Cenarium|<font color="#000090"> '''<sup>Talk</sup>'''</font>]]</span></strong> 03:29, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::I moved the one in the mainspace to wikipedia talk. Regarding the template, I can remove them if there is consensus. <span style="border:1px solid white;background-color: yellow; color: blue">[[User:Legoktm|Lego]][[Special:Contributions/Legoktm|K<sup>ontribs</sup>]][[user talk:Legoktm|T<sup>alk</sup>]]M</span> 05:08, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::This problem is not helped due to the fact that the InputBox extension is still not working correctly on Wikipedia and so the default place for submissions (unless the authors actually read the instructions ...) is main space. Obviously unregistered users can stuck here because they can't create in main space, but the registered ones get through. Lego, can you update the template so that the page still goes into the pending category even though the banner is not displayed? [[User talk:Msgj|MSGJ]] 12:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Or can we have an extra category for mainspace submissions? [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 13:01, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::::In any case, I think the template should remain hidden in mainspace since new users sometimes place them in existing articles. I also hid the [[:Category:Uncategorized Afc requests]] since it's used for maintenance. <strong><span style="font-family:Monotype;">[[User:Cenarium|<font color="#000080">Cenarium</font>]][[User_talk:Cenarium|<font color="#000090"> '''<sup>Talk</sup>'''</font>]]</span></strong> 18:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::I've put them in [[:Category:Uncategorized Afc requests]] for now. This needs cleaning out if anyone wants to help ... There are currently {{PAGESINCATEGORY:Uncategorized Afc requests}} pages in there. What seems to be happening a lot, is people submitting articles with the same title as an existing article in mainspace, so their suggestion just gets tagged to the end. I'm not sure how best to deal with these: just delete them? Or copy-paste them in the correct mainspace. [[User talk:Msgj|MSGJ]] 17:19, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I can get started with the clean-up. Just to be clear, the template simply needs to be deleted? Or do the users need to be alerted that their submission did not go through as well? <b><font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font>‑<font color="midnightblue"><big><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></big></font>-<font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font></b> 18:47, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::::If some of these are indeed misplaced submissions and not merely botched accepts, the articles should be given a once-over as they may be inappropriate. [[User:Someguy1221|Someguy1221]] ([[User talk:Someguy1221|talk]]) 20:24, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::There does not seem to be many now: see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&limit=500&target=Template%3AAFC+submission&namespace=0] Has everyone cleaned them up already? [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 21:26, 9 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes I have been busy! And I am assured that the software will be updated tomorrow Monday so this should not be as much of a problem. [[User talk:Msgj|MSGJ]] 22:19, 9 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I know this is an old topic, but I can go through these periodically with [[WP:AWB|AWB]] to get rid of the templates. [[User:Robert Skyhawk|Robert Skyhawk]] <sup>[[User_talk:Robert Skyhawk|So sue me!]]</sup> <small> ([[Special:Contributions/Robert Skyhawk|You'll lose]])</small> 22:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::I go through these occasionally, and I found it's good to try and find the diff where it was added. The people who get the AFC process that wrong sometimes do some pretty wierd stuff to articles (in addition to approved and botched submissions, there are also botched submissions placed on or pasted over existing articles). [[User:Someguy1221|Someguy1221]] ([[User talk:Someguy1221|talk]]) 05:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:I'm requesting a bot to remove these templates using AWB at [[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Robert SkyBot 2]]. AFC members are encouraged to comment if they see fit. [[User:Robert Skyhawk|Robert Skyhawk]] <sup>[[User_talk:Robert Skyhawk|So sue me!]]</sup> <small> ([[Special:Contributions/Robert Skyhawk|You'll lose]])</small> 19:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Deletion Discussion == |
|||
Hello. After limited discussion, I have sugested that [[:Category:Queued Afc requests]] be deleted, since it is arguably obseleted by [[:Category:Pending Afc requests]], and that editors comment on this question. Everyone who works with AFC is asked to comment; see the discussion on the category's [[Category talk:Queued Afc requests|talk page]]. Thanks mcuh, and I hope that we can get some input in this question. [[User:Robert Skyhawk|Robert Skyhawk]] <sup>[[User_talk:Robert Skyhawk|So sue me!]]</sup> <small> ([[Special:Contributions/Robert Skyhawk|You'll lose]])</small> 01:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I never knew this category was out there. It does seem to be obsolete now. However, would deleting it affect any templates or are there any templates that auto-populate that category? <b><font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font>‑<font color="midnightblue"><big><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></big></font>-<font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font></b> 04:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree that this category and also [[:Category:Held Afc requests]] be retired. They are populated from the {{tl|AFC submission}} template so that will need editing if this proposal is supported. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 09:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC) |
|||
On the subject of categories, submissions on [[:Category:Pending Afc requests]] are generally sorted chronologically, except those under the heading '''X''' which don't have a timestamp. I've been wondering whether it would be better to put these into the relevant '''H''' or '''P''' heading. But having no timestamp they will either have to go to the front (thus queue-jumping) or to the back (and thus risk not being seen until the category is completed cleared next. Neither seems ideal which is why I didn't do it before. Any thoughts? (Sorry if this is complete confusing!) [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 09:20, 20 December 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I've just depopulated both of those categories. Now [[:Category:Pending Afc requests]] is the only one used. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 16:23, 5 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
As no one commented on this I have used my own initiative :) The new system is: |
|||
*There is no X heading anymore. |
|||
*Users are instructed to add the timestamp when they resubmit. (This is the current time, so no queue-jumping...) So if the instructions are followed then all submissions should now be timestamped. |
|||
*If they leave off the timestamp then they will be permanently at the end of the queue so they will have to wait a long time. (I think this is fair enough!) |
|||
[[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 13:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==Problem with AFC submission== |
|||
I recently [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions/Ah Ken|submitted an article]] on a 19th century Chinese-American immigrant, Ah Ken, to WP:AFC. It was first declined on the basis that it was a candidate for speedy deletion and that the article did not assert its notability. I resumbitted that article pointing out that the article had already 14 cited references as well as additional material under the "Further reading" section which included an 1896 article from the ''[[Atlanta Constitution]]''. It was declined again by the same review who responded ''"You know why he's not notable, it'd because no one's going to be searching for the first chinese immigrant in America."'' I believe I've fufiled the requirements as per the AFC tutorial and I would appreciate if someone else could take a look at the article. [[Special:Contributions/96.237.198.7|96.237.198.7]] ([[User talk:96.237.198.7|talk]]) 01:09, 30 December 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Articles about people notable only for one event]] and [[Wikipedia:Notability (people)#People notable only for one event]] should answer your question. "Cover the event not the person." In this case, the event is early immigration into New York's Chinatown. The other reasons for his notability, namely being a local businessman, a possible boarding-house owner, and a precursor to the probably-also-not-notable Longfor/Occoo/Ava cigar monopoly, while interesting, don't make this person notable. |
|||
:The bulk of this content should be added to [[Chinatown, New York#History]], with information about the person that is not relevant to the history of New York's Chinatown removed. [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 01:38, 30 December 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:''Note:'' The contributor says he merged the content and he redirected the submission to the mainspace article. I undid the redirect, as it's not necessary and obscures the failed AFC submission. [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 20:49, 11 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Hello == |
|||
I am Ravi From Ambala .Would anybody tell How I can Share my hometown Information in the wikipedia. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Raviverma3187|Raviverma3187]] ([[User talk:Raviverma3187|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Raviverma3187|contribs]]) 09:54, 3 January 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:Hi. We already have an article about [[Ambala]]. You could edit and improve it if you like! [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 10:03, 3 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Banners == |
|||
I've been playing around with the project banners a little bit and decided that it might be easier to have two separate banners: one for all pages created through the AfC process and another for all the pages used to administer the project. So currently we have {{tl|WPAFC}} for putting on talk pages of pages created through AfC: |
|||
{{WPAFC|category=no}} |
|||
And now we have a simpler one {{tl|WPAFC/project}} for keeping track of all our discussion pages, templates, etc. |
|||
{{WPAFC/project|category=no}} |
|||
It means that we can keep the two types separate easily. Now all the project-administration pages are going into [[:Category:AfC project pages]], whereas all the other pages are in [[:Category:AFC articles by quality]]. Do you like it? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 14:01, 11 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Sounds good. [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 20:50, 11 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Templates == |
|||
Are there any templates for User Talk pages when you fail an article? Thanks. [[User:Empire3131|Empire3131]] ([[User talk:Empire3131|talk]]) 22:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:No, we don't usually tell them. There's one which I use to tell them if their article is on hold. {{tl|afc onhold}}. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 22:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Are there templates for successful nominations? I think I recall seeing one, but I'm not sure it's still around, because the timestamp was quite old. [[User:FingersOnRoids|<span style="color:gray">FingersOn</span><b><span style="color:darkred">Roids♫</span></b>]] 17:32, 22 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes, it's {{tl|Afc talk}}. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 17:48, 22 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::Oops. I might have quite a new users that might be wondering why their nomination disappeared. [[User:FingersOnRoids|<span style="color:gray">FingersOn</span><b><span style="color:darkred">Roids♫</span></b>]] 00:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Should be okay, because it will redirect to the new article! — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 14:53, 23 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== List of articles == |
|||
Can a list of articles awaiting creation be created like the list at [[WP:PRODSUM]]? - title + timestamp [[Special:Contributions/76.66.198.171|76.66.198.171]] ([[User talk:76.66.198.171|talk]]) 00:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Hmm, it probably could be arranged. But what would be the advantage over [[:Category:Pending Afc requests]]? The submissions are already sorted by date in that category. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 09:26, 18 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Ease of reading, and an archived list can also be created from it, when articles are processed off it. [[Special:Contributions/76.66.198.171|76.66.198.171]] ([[User talk:76.66.198.171|talk]]) 05:57, 23 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::It might also be of interest to people who read the ''WikiDeletion Today'' notice [[Special:Contributions/76.66.196.229|76.66.196.229]] ([[User talk:76.66.196.229|talk]]) 00:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== An attempt to create an article == |
|||
You guys might be interested in {{user|189.148.8.91}} and [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Creating article in talk page]]. --[[User talk:NE2|NE2]] 07:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Article alerts == |
|||
I have just discovered this [[User:ArticleAlertbot|very useful bot]], run by [[User:Legoktm|one of our members]], which creates alerts about articles within the scope of a particular project. Its output can be found at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Article alerts]]. It currently says: |
|||
{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Article alerts}} |
|||
Personally I think this is really useful. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 15:26, 22 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== hi == |
|||
Why is there a "Show" button in the box that says "Redirects for creation are shown at blah blah blah?" --[[Special:Contributions/24.184.206.83|24.184.206.83]] ([[User talk:24.184.206.83|talk]]) 23:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Wizard for dabs == |
|||
The [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Wizard-Advanced]] has useful special items for "new redirect" and "new category" but nothing for "new dab page". I think it would be useful to have a "new dab" option, since the review of a proposed dab page (such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Submissions/Kuusela]) should be a quicker and different process than the review of a regular article. [[Special:Contributions/62.147.39.194|62.147.39.194]] ([[User talk:62.147.39.194|talk]]) 21:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Just add in your proposal as an article, if we slice and dice it too much, some things won't be examined. The DAB pages I have seen can be moved to article space like any other articles. The acceptance criteria may differ, but not so much as to be a problem. Any way most contributors ignore the acceptance criteria, and make a contribution that is declined (unfortunately). [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 03:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::I have now created an option (in the "advanced uses" section) for new disambiguation pages. Requests will go in [[:Category:Pending Afc requests]] as usual, but with different preload template and editing instructions. Please have a look at [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Wizard-DAB]] and let me know what you think. I will also do one for templates when I get round to it. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 10:20, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::Dab wizard is not working properly, the preload template isn't loading. [[Special:Contributions/76.66.196.229|76.66.196.229]] ([[User talk:76.66.196.229|talk]]) 14:22, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::Fixed. [[User:Someguy1221|Someguy1221]] ([[User talk:Someguy1221|talk]]) 14:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Thanks Someguy! [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 15:00, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== duplicate names == |
|||
I was wondering how different people submitting articles with the same name are treated... Is the old pending, rejected or redirected submission just overwritten, or does something else happen? [[Special:Contributions/76.66.196.229|76.66.196.229]] ([[User talk:76.66.196.229|talk]]) 00:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:The second suggester gets to edit the first article, so it depends what the contributor does with it, they can delete or change it. The acceptors who assess the article will get to see it how it ends up, and may never see the earlier version, so if there was a good contribution, that was overwritten with rubbish, it will be rejected. [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 03:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== suggestion - separate category request page == |
|||
I suggest that the category request and redirect request pages be separated, for one, the name of the request page is "redirects", second, categories seem to take a lot longer to process, so should not be archived by bot with the time limit set for redirects. [[Special:Contributions/76.66.196.229|76.66.196.229]] ([[User talk:76.66.196.229|talk]]) 00:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Both are on the same page, because they cannot be accepted by moving to the article with the name proposed. [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 03:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree that the name of the page is a bit misleading but the vast majority of requests on that page are for redirects. Category requests are quite a rare occurence. Having a separare page just makes an extra page for reviewers to check unnecesarily. The archiving is not an issue because only unanswered requests are never archived. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 09:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Actually unanswered requests ''are'' archived. And so are unclosed but queried requests. The only section that has never been auto-archived is c5.0 (I think that's because it's missing a timestamp) [[Special:Contributions/76.66.196.229|76.66.196.229]] ([[User talk:76.66.196.229|talk]]) 14:41, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::Please show me an unanswered request which has been archived. I don't believe the bot touches these. Yes, queried requests will be, but only if there is no response for a week which I think is ample. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 15:00, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::[[Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects/2008-11]] |
|||
:::: If a queried request is not processed, then it should be closed before archiving, no? |
|||
:::: Perhaps a backlog page should be added, for all requested archived before being closed. |
|||
::::[[Special:Contributions/76.66.196.229|76.66.196.229]] ([[User talk:76.66.196.229|talk]]) 07:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Template placed on new user's talk page for decline? == |
|||
So after declining a new article based on A7-Bio I noticed that there is no template to add to the user's talk page like there is for when we accept an article or put one on hold. I wrote something of my own composition, but I'm wondering if one already exists. Whether or not it exists, it is not mentioned in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions]]. At least people make the effort to come to AfC to get a new article approved. We should at least have a template for telling them why their article was declined. If it doesn't already exist perhaps I will create one later. However I don't want to create a duplicate of something that may already exist. [[User:Valley2city|<b><span style="background: blue; color: white;"><font face="Comic Sans MS">Valley</font></span></b>]]2[[User talk:Valley2city|<b><span style="background: skyblue; color:white;">city</span></b><sup>‽</sup>]] 18:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:No, there isn't one. Of course you can create one if you think it would be useful. Personally I do not think it is necessary for the following reasons: |
|||
:#We put the decline reason on the article itself. Putting it on the user talk page as well would duplicate our work, and we don't want to make it harder than necessary for reviewers. |
|||
:#The pending template tells the author to check back to see the outcome of the review. Even if they don't know about [[Special:MyContributions]] they should be able to find the page in their browser history. |
|||
:#There are a lot of submissions which will ''never'' make articles. We get a lot of rubbish such as copyright violations, gibberish, vandalism, etc. We do not want to encourage these people to submit articles! The submissions which do have merit are typically put on hold, and in this case I always advise the author (using [[Template:Afc onhold]]) as these are the people we should encourage: the ones with the skill to write an article but not necessarily familiar with the policies around here. |
|||
:Of course there are special cases when I drop the author a note. In these cases, a custom message is often appropriate. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 02:29, 12 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== John Mahan article == |
|||
When I was creating the article for this I was unsure whether I should have created it at [[John Mahan]] or [[John Mahan (boxer)]] as a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=John+Mahan&fulltext=Search quick search] seems to indicate that there are plenty of "John Mahans" out there. Should I create a disambiguation page? <font color="purple">[[User:NanohaA'sYuri|Nan<font color="red">oha<font color = "blue">A's<font color="green">Yu<font color = "yellow">ri]]</font></font></font></font></font><sup>[[User_talk:NanohaA'sYuri|Talk]], [[User:Vivio Testarossa|My master]]</sup> 01:00, 12 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:It seems there are no other John Mahans on Wikipedia yet, so there is no reason why he should not be at [[John Mahan]]. If more come along in future then they would be called [[John Mahan (something)]]. But unless a particular one is clearly more well known than him, it would not be necessary to move the article in my opinion. A disambig page could go at [[John Mahan (disambiguation)]]. Of course, there would be no harm in redirecting [[John Mahan (boxer)]] to [[John Mahan]]. Hope this helps. Some more info at [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people)]]. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 02:10, 12 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==[[Wikipedia:Drawing board]] needs assistance== |
|||
<div id="Wikipedia:Drawing Board needs assistance" /> |
|||
The Wikipedia:Drawing Board, where new contributors can go to get feedback on articles (and are encouraged to do so at [[WP:YFA]]), is in need of a contributor or two. It is very low traffic at the moment--with a request every 2-5 days or so--but requests are going unanswered. We had a bit more participation in responders last autumn, which was good because we were busier then (see [[Wikipedia:Drawing board/Archives/2008/October]], for instance), but they seem to have moved on. |
|||
The primary value of this board in my opinion is that it gives us an opportunity to educate contributors ''before'' they hit the [[WP:CSD]] point. Most responses boil down to pointing out the relevant notability guideline, explaining how to verify, and discouraging non-neutral contributions. Usually, it's an opportunity to say, "You really shouldn't create that article" in a friendly, non-bitey fashion. There's a lot of repetition, because evidently they don't read each other's questions and answers. Occasionally, we get an opportunity to help a new contributor with a good, notable subject figure out the wiki way. |
|||
Anyone up for watchlisting and pitching in? I've been one of the more consistent maintainers for well over a year now, and though I'm a bit burnt out on it, I hate to see it wither on the vine. I checked on it yesterday and found unanswered requests going back to January 24th (I've caught it up), which kind of suggests that at the moment it has no other eyes. |
|||
([[WP:VPM]] recommended this as a good forum for "advertising" the position, and it seems like a good fit to me. :)) --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 13:27, 14 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:I have no problem adding it to my watchlist. I've gone ahead and removed some advertising/edit tests from the page. Best, <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 20:27, 14 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks. :) I much appreciate it. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 21:15, 14 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Interesting. I had actually never heard of this page before. I think it certainly something that reviewers here could help with. You might not know that all AfC reviewers can recite the notability policy by rote, and spot a copyright violation at 20 yards :) Seriously though, maybe we could take this page under our wing and push it a bit more? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 08:50, 16 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Then it seems I've asked at the perfect place. :) I think it would be a great idea to promote it more as long as there are enough volunteers to maintain it. Our burst of busyness in the fall related to its being made more prominent at YFA. We were moved to the first line, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Your_first_article&oldid=244942567 here], which seemed to lead a lot of new contributors to thinking they were required to discuss their new articles. Strained our resources to the bursting point. :) After we were relocated from point 1 to point 5, things quieted down. I think it's a good forum, though, and I've always enjoyed particularly enjoyed it when I've had an opportunity to help somebody get their idea to article stage. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 12:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==Completed Afc requests== |
|||
With 3,748 articles, [[:Category:Completed Afc requests]] is getting very large and unwieldy. Ideally, authors should be able to find their declined submissions in here, but it's currently not that easy to do. The entries are sorted by submission date, so if there is a delay before their submission is reviewed then it will immediately be far down this category. |
|||
I've been experimenting with another possibility: categorising by month of submission. See for example [[:Category:Declined AfC submissions in February 2009]]. This will make for smaller categories, but still quite big I suspect. Of course we could do a daily category which would be similar to the daily list that we used to have. Does anyone have any thoughts or suggestions on this? [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 11:29, 16 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:A good idea, I created the cat for January, but they seem to be thinly populated. DO we have to flush all the articles to recat them? [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 11:56, 16 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Performing [[wp:null edit|null edit]]s to submissions will add them to the relevant category straightaway, but the categories will populate themselves eventually so I wouldn't waste time going around doing manually. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 12:12, 16 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::A set of lists, like what happens at the XfD deletion pages would work. It could be set up and run by bot, probably. [[Special:Contributions/76.66.196.229|76.66.196.229]] ([[User talk:76.66.196.229|talk]]) 08:01, 17 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::A daily category might achieve the same and it could be automatically maintained by the templates without any need of a bot. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 16:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
I'm experimenting with a daily category now. Any other thoughts on this would be welcome. [[User talk:Msgj|Martin]] 13:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:The daily categories are about the right size. The navigation could go across more days, and have previous months, once these are included. This should make it easier to find. It already helped me find something a requester wanted to know about. [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 21:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Okay then, let's do it. But can you hold off mass-creating the categories because I think we can name them in such a way that the header template will not need a parameter, and this will simplify things quite a bit. For example, if we called them [[:Category:AfC submissions by date/22 Feb 2009]] then we can use the ''titleparts'' parser function to extract the date '''22 Feb 2009''' and the ''time'' parser function to extract the date, month and year as required. Does this naming system sound okay? [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|Msgj]]</sup> 17:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::I would expect that the WP naming standards would say use the full name of the month rather than an abbreviation. Is there a function that can extract the title and chop the first three letters off the month, (and add a 0 to single digit days?) [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 20:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::The ''[[mw:Help:Extension:ParserFunctions##time:|time]]'' function is very flexible. So, are we going with [[:Category:AfC submissions by date/22 February 2009]]? [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|Msgj]]</sup> 21:11, 22 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
If anyone else wants to help creating these categories, feel free :) Just add the {{tl|AFC submission category header}} to the top of each one. [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|msgj]]</sup> 12:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Between me and ESanchez013 (mainly ESanchez013), we have created all the necessary categories until the end of the year. [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|msgj]]</sup> 20:52, 23 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks for fixing this up and deleting all the categories I made! [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 03:54, 4 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== When to decline versus hold? == |
|||
I've read both the [[WP:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions|WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions]] and [[WP:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions/short|WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions/short]], and I'm still not clear on when to decline and when to hold an article. My gut has been saying that if there's any chance that this could end up being an [[WP:encyclopedic|encyclopedic]] article, it should go on hold. In particular, if the issue is a lack of sources, I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt—most people who don't have experience here, I've found, think that MySpace is a source. Now, I'm ''not'' saying it is (far from it!), but I think if there's a chance that the article could someday qualify, we should hold it and point them towards where to get more info about sources. |
|||
Using [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions/Royal Delano Wayne]] as an example: its sources were one MySpace page (useless), one solid newspaper article (great!), and one link to [[Alibris]] (mixed). I {{diff|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions/Royal Delano Wayne|prev|271243279|set it to hold}}, and added some advice on what counted towards notability. Thirty minutes later, another editor {{diff|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions/Royal Delano Wayne|prev|271249171|re-set it to declined}}. |
|||
Note that I do ''not'' have an issue with what the 2nd editor did. My question is, how do I know when to decline these so that I don't feel like I'm wasting my time? [[User:DoriSmith|Dori]] ([[User talk:DoriSmith|Talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/DoriSmith|Contribs]]) 03:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Whether to decline or hold is really a subjective decision; there is no black and white guideline here. I usually follow a similar philosophy to that which you mentioned above: If a submission has a good chance of getting improved to article quality within 24 hours, I will place it on hold. But if the submission is clearly sub-par and would take a fundamental change to improve to standard (especially for long submissions), then I decline it. I also have a couple of "quick-fail" criteria for submissions; for example, I instantly decline any submissions I find that do not have any sources. I also tend to decline obvious [[WP:CSD#A7|A7]] violations, as these are usually indicative of a fundamentally non-notable subject. Keep in mind that declining isn't the end of the line for a submission, it simply means that the submission is missing something fundamental to its becoming a successful article. I hope I've helped a bit...if you need specific help, I would be happy to look over any of your reviewed submissions. [[User:Robert Skyhawk|Robert Skyhawk]] <sup>[[User_talk:Robert Skyhawk|So sue me!]]</sup> <small> ([[Special:Contributions/Robert Skyhawk|You'll lose]])</small> 03:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks—here's a couple where [[User:Giants27|Giants27]] and I disagreed with each other (one in each direction): |
|||
::* [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions/Royal Delano Wayne|Royal Delano Wayne]] |
|||
:::<small>Writer. Sources: one newspaper article + two less useful links.</small> |
|||
::* [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions/Diter Hakrama|Diter Hakrama]] |
|||
:::<small>High school soccer player. Sources: one blog, two online forums.</small> |
|||
::What do you all (not just [[User:Robert Skyhawk|Robert Skyhawk]]) think? [[User:DoriSmith|Dori]] ([[User talk:DoriSmith|Talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/DoriSmith|Contribs]]) 04:52, 17 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:I think that if something is on hold, then it should not be declined in under 24 hours to let the contributor fix it. I am guessing that the short time declines were a mistake. In fact I reckon that hold should be allowed to go for a week. [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 05:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==Decline this one== |
|||
Hi, I think you should decline the page about Rudens Turku because it's a straight copy-paste from his website. [[User:Nerfari|Nerfari]] ([[User talk:Nerfari|talk]]) 20:29, 23 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:{{tick|18}} '''Done''' Thanks for catching that! <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 20:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Maybe you would be interesting in reviewing some? [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|msgj]]</sup> 20:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== New redirect template == |
|||
I created a new template for accepting/rejecting redirects. It's currently over at [[User:Kenb215/TemplateSandbox]]. If there are no objections I'd like to update the current one ([[Template:afc redirect]]) with this one. The new one is reverse compatible with the old one so it shouldn't cause any problems. Anyone have any suggestions? -- [[User:Kenb215|kenb215]] [[User talk:Kenb215|talk]] 01:56, 24 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:<s>Looks good. Can you maybe combine [[Template:Afc notarget]] as well?</s> Sorry, see you have already. [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|msgj]]</sup> 07:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:The template was changed so that the parser function text no longer appears when the template is substituted. As a side effect the template now ''needs'' to be subst'ed or it will break. Hopefully this won't be a problem as it was already supposed to be subst'ed anyway.  -- [[User:Kenb215|kenb215]] [[User talk:Kenb215|talk]] 00:24, 27 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
I added a new switch for when multiple redirects are suggested at once. -- [[User:Kenb215|kenb215]] [[User talk:Kenb215|talk]] 06:29, 5 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Our first article == |
|||
I must have too much time on my hands. I spent some time, out of curiosity, trying to find the very first article created through Afc. And I think it's [[Horsea Island]] on 5 Dec 2005. Just in case anyone else cares :) [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|msgj]]</sup> 11:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Naming of submissions == |
|||
What do people think about removing "Submissions" from the titles of submissions. So they would have the title [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gautham Sriram]], for example. It would make the categories less messy. [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|msgj]]</sup> 11:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:If it would make the category less messy, that would be a good thing. Would it just be a matter of removing that part from the wizard? <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 12:54, 26 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Yes, I've also disabled the warning in the reviewer tools which tells you when a location is in the wrong place. This can be set again when all the pending submissions are in the same place. [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|msgj]]</sup> 16:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::Hmm. One thing I've noticed is that renaming the submissions has removed the backlink to the category. For example, [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Long Island Transit|this submission]] no longer has link to the category at the top of the page, rather it links back to this page. I'm not sure if this is a good thing or a bad thing. <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 20:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::Ah yes, that is because some redirected [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions]] to the category. I agree that was quite nice. But the category is at the bottom of the page as usual, and there is also a link to it in the "pending" template. [[User:Msgj|Martin]]<sup>[[User talk:Msgj|msgj]]</sup> 22:18, 3 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Coordinators' working group == |
|||
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Coordinators' working group|WikiProject coordinators' working group]], an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators. |
|||
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — <small>Delievered by <font color="green">[[User:ShepBot|'''§hepBot''']]</font>''' <small>(<font color="red">[[User talk:ShepBot|Disable]]</font>)'''</small> on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 04:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)? |
|||
:Regarding this group, is there anyone who would be interested in representing this WikiProject? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 18:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::I will sign up for AFC. This group cause a lot of debate in the Australia Project, but hopefully settled now. [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 20:45, 11 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==[[Wikipedia:Article alerts|Article alerts]]== |
|||
This is a notice to let you know about '''''[[Wikipedia:Article alerts|Article alerts]]''''', a [[WP:BOTS|fully-automated]] subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles tagged by their banner enter a workflow such as [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|Articles for deletion]], [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment|Requests for comment]], and [[Wikipedia:Peer review|Peer review]] ([[Wikipedia:Article alerts#Workflows covered|full list]]). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found at [[Wikipedia:Article alerts#Samples|here]]. |
|||
If you are already subscribed to ''Article Alerts'', it is now easier to [[Wikipedia talk:Article alerts/Bugs|report bugs]] and [[Wikipedia talk:Article alerts/Feature requests|request new features]]. |
|||
The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the <code>display=none</code> parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". |
|||
<!--Addbot-Wikiproject-Article-Alerts-Message-01--><small>This is an automated message sent out by [[User:Addbot|Addbot]] to all wikiprojects per request</small> '''[[User:Addshore|<span style="color:black;">·Add§hore·</span>]]''' <sup>[[User_talk:Addshore|<span style="color:black;">T<small>alk</small> T<small>o</small> M<small>e</small>!</span>]]</sup></span> 20:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Tips for finding submissions == |
|||
Comments and improvements are invited on [[Template:Where's my article?]], which I've made to go at the top of the submission categories to help people find their submissions. Also, are there any other places where this would be appropriate? It currently says the following. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 07:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
{{Where's my article?}} |
|||
==Declined because already exists - strange message == |
|||
Why does the decline message when something already exists say "Please do not take it personally, but use the advice given to submit an article which meets the criteria."? [[User:Nerfari|Nerfari]] ([[User talk:Nerfari|talk]]) 13:51, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:That's the default message if there is something wrong with the parsers in the template. To which submission were you referring? I can take a look and see if there is something with which I can help. <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 14:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Well for example [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lauryl dimethylamine Oxide]] (I made a stub myself because the submission was unreferenced). But normally you should say something like "Don't forget to search Wikipedia because you make your next submission". [[User:Nerfari|Nerfari]] ([[User talk:Nerfari|talk]]) 14:08, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::Ah, I see what you mean now. We shouldn't tell submitters to follow the criteria if the article already exists. We could change the phrase to say something like "Please do not take it personally, but use the advice given to submit an article which meets the criteria. If you have submitted an article which already exists, consider visiting <nowiki>[[ARTICLENAME]]</nowiki> to see if you can help improve it." That may be a little verbose, though. Thoughts? <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 14:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::If you can only have one message, maybe you could condense it, for example: "If your submission did not meet our criteria, but you can address the reasons given, you are encouraged to make improvements and resubmit it. When ready, please add the text <nowiki>{{subst:AFC submission/submit}}</nowiki> at the top of the article to request a new review. If the article already exists, consider visiting <nowiki>[[ARTICLENAME]]</nowiki> to see if you can help improve it. " [[User:Nerfari|Nerfari]] ([[User talk:Nerfari|talk]]) 18:46, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Nerfari, I suggest being [[wp:bold|bold]]. The template is [[Template:AFC submission/declined]]. I quite like your wording, but I can't quite see how <nowiki>[[ARTICLENAME]]</nowiki> is going to work here. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 19:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::::OK I tried something please check nothing is broken. The existing article title is already mentioned so they should be able to find it. [[User:Nerfari|Nerfari]] ([[User talk:Nerfari|talk]]) 19:13, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::No you didn't break it. I made a couple of changes. I put back the typewriter text tt to separate the code from the prose. And the line about "if the article exists" only applies in one case. So maybe it would be better to edit the custom messages, which can be found at [[Template:AFC submission/comments]]? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 19:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Tnxman307's administrator candidacy == |
|||
A member of the project, [[User:Tnxman307|Tnxman307]], is currently a candidate to receive access to [[Wikipedia:Administrators|administrative tools]]. Project members who have worked with the candidate and have an opinion of [[User:Tnxman307|Tnxman307's]] fitness to receive these tools are cordially invited to [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/{{#if:|{{{2}}}|Tnxman307}} 2|comment]]. |
|||
== Redirect Creation == |
|||
A heads up - the template placed on redirect talk pages, {{t1|WikiProject Redirect}}, is being considered for deletion. If you are active in creating redirects, please be aware that this template will probably be defunct soon (consensus seems headed that way). <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 19:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:This might be a good time to confirm that we still want to keep track of redirects created in this way. Personally I like being able to show the work that this project does, and the banners can bring us publicity which hopefully brings more reviewers to us. But some people think that creating talk pages of redirects is quite pointless. What do others think? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 18:47, 11 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::I like keeping track of the pages we create, redirects or otherwise. I don't have any numbers to back this up, but I feel that our number of active participants has increased over the past few months. Banners are just one way to track our activity. <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 23:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::I think that keeping track of the articles you guys create is a good thing, but can you not tag redirects with WikiProject banners? When you tag a redirect with <nowiki>{{WPMILHIST|class=redirect}}</nowiki> it gets categorized into [[:Category:Unassessed military history articles]]...I found about 5 redirects in my last run-through of the category (~100 articles assessed), and it just wastes the time of whoever is assessing. :/ Thanks, —'''<font face="Script MT Bold">[[User:the_ed17|<font color="800000">Ed <font color="00008B">17]] <sup><small>[[User talk:the_ed17|<font color="800000">(Talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/the_ed17|<font color="800000">Contribs)]]</small></sup></font></font face>''' 22:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Our userbox == |
|||
I have just edited our userbox {{tl|AfC user}} to change the background colour to match the status colour of {{tl|AFC status}}. So you can tell at a glance whether we're backlogged or not. And, if you hover the mouse over the image, it will tell you the number of pending submissions. Like it? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 18:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:It looks really good. However, the mouse-over does not appear to be working, as it just shows the image description. Otherwise, it looks like a handy way to track the status of the category. <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 19:26, 12 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Wow...that's really cool! '''[[User:Akradecki|<font style="color:#62BB32;">AK<font style="color:#006400;">Radecki</font></font>]]'''<sup>[[User_talk:Akradecki|<font style="color:#62BB32;">Speaketh</font>]]</sup> 23:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::Worked on Firefox 3. Can you get a link to the submissions as well so we can click somewhere on it to see them? [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 05:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::I've been trying to link the image to the pending category. It can be done but then the title stops working! It seems to be an error in the software. So where else can the link to the category go? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 15:27, 13 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Which browser are you using Tnxman? It seems to work for the rest of us. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 15:28, 13 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::Firefox 3.0.7. I wonder, though, if the popups gadget breaks the function. Would popups override the display you set up? <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 15:54, 13 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Images for Upload backlog == |
|||
{{done}} |
|||
Hey, there is a 10 image backlog at [[Wikipedia:Images for upload]]. If we wait much longer, some of these users will be autoconfirmed by then, thus defeating the purpose of the process ;) If you have never helped out before, it really isn't that hard. The instructions are at [[Wikipedia:Images_for_upload/ReviewerInstructions]]. Just make sure there is proof of a compatible license and all the information is filled out. Most requests are incomplete so I doubt all of the backlog will need uploading. Thanks!-[[User:Andrew c|Andrew c]] [[User talk:Andrew c|<sup>[talk]</sup>]] 17:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Changing Template:Afc mm == |
|||
I'd like to change {{tl|afc mm}}. It's used to moderate a bunch of submissions at once. Since page submissions each have their own page now, it's only use is for the redirects and categories page, which are usually accepted. I'd like to change the template behavior to accept all by default, and add a parameter to decline all. A sample can be found at [[User:Kenb215/TemplateSandbox|my sandbox]] ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Kenb215/TemplateSandbox&oldid=277254047 permanent]). Any comments? -- [[User:Kenb215|kenb215]] [[User talk:Kenb215|talk]] 21:22, 14 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:No problem with changing it. I wonder if we actually need this tempate anymore? It was only created to deal with the huge backlogs which happily we don't have nowadays. There are a handful of transclusions which you might want to substitute before changing the template. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 22:10, 14 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== A bunch are showing up in the uncat cat...any ideas why? == |
|||
Check out [[:Category:Uncategorized Afc requests]]...lots are showing up in the wrong space...much more than normal...and without the AfC templates...any ideas if one of the templates is malfunctioning? '''[[User:Akradecki|<font style="color:#62BB32;">AK<font style="color:#006400;">Radecki</font></font>]]'''<sup>[[User_talk:Akradecki|<font style="color:#62BB32;">Speaketh</font>]]</sup> 03:41, 18 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Someguy has done a trawl for lost submissions, as he occasionally does. However because we changed the location, a few false positives have occured. See [[User talk:MSGJ#Tracking lost submissions]] for a few more details. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 07:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Someguy1221's administrator candidacy == |
|||
A member of the project, [[User:Someguy1221|Someguy1221]], is currently a candidate to receive access to [[Wikipedia:Administrators|administrative tools]]. Project members who have worked with the candidate and have an opinion of [[User:Someguy1221|Someguy1221's]] fitness to receive these tools are cordially invited to [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Someguy1221|comment]]. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 20:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==Placing new article on the Project page instead of the Talk page== |
|||
I submitted an article using AfC for the first time. I noticed that the articles are placed on the talk page of the request instead of the project page. Is there a reason for this? Personally, I think that the article should be on the project page so that any talk about the article can be put on the talk page. Maybe I'm missing something. Any thoughts? [[User:OlYeller21|<font style="color:#827839;">Ol<font style="color:#FBB117;">Yeller</font></font>]]'''<sup>[[User_talk:OlYeller21|<font style="color:#827839;">Talktome</font>]]</sup> 16:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Anonymous users cannot create project pages, but they can create talk pages. [[User:Someguy1221|Someguy1221]] ([[User talk:Someguy1221|talk]]) 17:16, 19 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Ah, right. Makes perfect sense. Thanks for clearing that up for me. [[User:OlYeller21|<font style="color:#827839;">Ol<font style="color:#FBB117;">Yeller</font></font>]]'''<sup>[[User_talk:OlYeller21|<font style="color:#827839;">Talktome</font>]]</sup> 17:31, 19 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Cleanup of old denied submissions as per [[WP:CSD#G6|G6]] == |
|||
Can old denied submissions be deleted as maintinence unger G6?--[[User:Ipatrol|Ipatrol]] ([[User talk:Ipatrol|talk]]) 22:37, 20 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:This was discussed once before at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/2008#Deletion guidelines]]. I don't think they should be deleted because there's really not much point. The reviewing instructions do recommend deleting blatantly bad faith submission (although, disclaimer: I wrote them), but everything else since December 2005 has been archived. Also, AFC submissions are all tagged with {{tl|NOINDEX}} so they don't show up for most search engines. I don't really see a benefit from hiding these things from view. [[User:Someguy1221|Someguy1221]] ([[User talk:Someguy1221|talk]]) 23:34, 20 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::I agree. For most submissions, deletion is unnecessary and would add to the burden on administrators. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:02, 21 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::We should be keeping the old submissions, unless they are harmful. One question I have is why is there no nonsense any more. There used to be plenty of blank or random typing or crazy submissions in the past, but what is there now looks reasonable. Are the AfC reviewers getting in fast and elimenating the problematic stuff? [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 04:08, 23 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::I guess that is the reason. I think people are doing the easy declines/accepts and leaving the tricky ones. I notice that at the moment, [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nathaniel Frank|Nathaniel Frank]] and [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anne Wortham|Anne Wortham]] have been in the queue for well over a week. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 06:58, 23 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
For some reason, the editor above has been editing our status template {{tl|AFC status}} to include an image, and edit warring with Someguy and myself. I have no idea why, as he/she does not even participate in the WikiProject as far as I know. Perhaps some other people could join the discussion over there. Personally I don't see the advantage of any image. The "edit war" has been happening on [[Template:AFC status/code]]. Thanks, — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 16:20, 21 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Problems with Reviewing? == |
|||
I just wanted to check with other users: I just tried to review two submissions (both declines), but adding the normal code didn't do anything. Has anyone else run across this? <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 13:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:It's because Adradecki [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Zero_reject&diff=279059272&oldid=279023602 added] a "P" so your "D" was looked at. I'm not sure why he did this as it shouldn't be necessary. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 14:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Declined Copyvio Template == |
|||
When I paste the url in, it doesn't show on the template like it's supposed to. Was this changed, or is it meant to be like this now? [[User:FingersOnRoids|<span style="color:gray">FingersOn</span><b><span style="color:darkred">Roids♫</span></b>]] 21:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:It's because the ? in the URL confuses the template. You can fix it by making it explicit that it is the 3rd unnamed parameter by adding 3=, like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Turkish_International_Cooperation_and_Development_Agency_(TIKA)&diff=next&oldid=279666331 this]. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 21:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks! [[User:FingersOnRoids|<span style="color:gray">FingersOn</span><b><span style="color:darkred">Roids♫</span></b>]] 22:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Holds == |
|||
There seem to be an inordinate amount of holds in the AFC noms, including some which have no third party sources and no notability to be found, looking at google and google news. Is it against the policy to decline ones put on hold by other reviewers? Couldn't find policy on that. [[User:FingersOnRoids|<span style="color:gray"><sup>FingersOn</sup></span><b><span style="color:darkred"><sub>Roids</sub></span></b>]] 23:00, 25 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Not really. It's usually best to give the submitter time to try to improve the article though (I usually wait 24-48 hours). If there really isn't any notability to be found, you may want to ask the original reviewer their rationale for placing the article on hold rather than declining it. <font color="darkorange">[[User:Tnxman307|TN]]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>[[User talk:Tnxman307|X]]</big></font></b><font color="red">[[Special:Contributions/Tnxman307|Man]]</font> 23:06, 25 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::{{done}} - Left messages on talk pages. [[User:FingersOnRoids|<span style="color:gray"><sup>FingersOn</sup></span><b><span style="color:darkred"><sub>Roids</sub></span></b>]] 00:55, 26 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::Personally, I usually decline submissions without sources straight away. They are told at many stages of the wizard that requests without sources cannot be accepted. I'll put articles on hold if I think they are fairly close to being acceptable. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 06:07, 26 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Template:Afc comment]] == |
|||
For some reason, the template isn't working for me anymore. The text just disappears. Any ideas why? [[User:FingersOnRoids|<span style="color:darkgreen">ƒingers</span><span style="color:gray"><b><sup>on</sup></b></span><b><span style="color:darkred"><sub>Roids</sub></span></b>]] 01:24, 27 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:It looks like [[user:Ipatrol]] was trying something tricky with the template that stopped it working. I put it back how it was. Remember to use subst: on the front of the subst:afc comment , to increase the speed of serving the page. [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 03:12, 27 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Redirect Template == |
|||
I've created the redirect [[Template:Afc accept]] to the [[Template:Afc redirect]], as that template is still used by Henrik's tool. Just a heads up. Cheers. '''''[[User:ImperatorExercitus|<font color=#6495ED><font size=4>I</font></font>]]''''''<sup><small>[[User_Talk:ImperatorExercitus|<font color=black>mperator</font>]]</sup></small> 14:25, 2 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:I asked [[User:DoriSmith]] a while ago to take a look at Henrik's tool to see if it might be updated to work with the new processes. I wonder if he has made any progress with it ... — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 18:07, 5 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Sadly, I haven't gotten very far {{):}}. That's partly because WP's JS is somewhat odd, and partly because I'm having trouble figuring out how to test it without mangling pages or freaking people out when a bunch of crud suddenly appears. Any ideas? What's been done before? <span style='font:bold 1.2em "Apple Garamond","Adobe Garamond Pro",Garamond,serif;color:#369;'>[[User:DoriSmith|Dori]] ❦ ([[User talk:DoriSmith|Talk]] ❖ [[Special:Contributions/DoriSmith|Contribs]] ❖ [[WP:Editor review/DoriSmith|Review]]) ❦</span> 22:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC) (who prefers "she," btw...) |
|||
::Before i created a sandbox copy of the contributions with the same prefix and tried it out. I created a js [[User:Graeme Bartlett/js/afc-helper.js]] for this purpose, but when trying to use fancy template format as well it was beyond me (I can write js but not template). Graeme Bartlett 00:22, 7 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::I don't think anyone is going to mind you testing out the script in project space. I often create test pages such as [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/test]] for this purpose. Graeme, I can template but not JS, maybe we should get together ;) — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 11:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Category:Requested edits == |
|||
Would [[:Category:Requested edits]] be in the scope of this project? I've been trying to promote it for sometime to get the backlog taken care of and see the good work of this project at [[WP:IFU]]. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 21:56, 4 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:At first glance it doesn't appear to fall within our scope although it may well be something that people here could help with. It strikes me as quite similar to [[:Category:Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests]], which doesn't often suffer from backlogs. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 18:03, 5 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==Uncategorized Pages== |
|||
I've been seeing a lot of articles showing up in [[:Category:Uncategorized Afc requests]] recently, and it appears to me that that's because registered users are beginning the AFC process, but then somehow saving the article in mainspace instead (i.e., new mainspace articles with the AFC template). Is there any good way to minimize this happening? If we catch them first, we can move the article then rate it, but when others find them, they're either CSD'd or Prod'd—neither of which is a friendly way to handle contributions by newbies. Is there maybe a way to force articles containing {{tl|AFC submission}} to only be saved at [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation]]? <span style='font:bold 1.2em "Apple Garamond","Adobe Garamond Pro",Garamond,serif;color:#369;'>[[User:DoriSmith|Dori]] ❦ ([[User talk:DoriSmith|Talk]] ❖ [[Special:Contributions/DoriSmith|Contribs]] ❖ [[WP:Editor review/DoriSmith|Review]]) ❦</span> 22:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Perhaps we should not hide the template when it is in article space, but advertise it's presence in some way so that the contributor will clean it out themselves. The idea was that registered users do it all themselves if they can. Graeme Bartlett 00:41, 7 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Perhaps an abuse filter could be created to warn users if they are creating an article outside project talk space with the afc submission template...[[User:Someguy1221|Someguy1221]] ([[User talk:Someguy1221|talk]]) 01:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
The best way to solve this, if it were possible, would be to automatically add the prefix ''Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/'' to all titles. However the InputBox extension does not currently support this. I think I requested it once, but it might be worth asking again because it would be very helpful. Given that this is not possible, I see no compelling reason to treat these pages any differently to any other new pages. The fact that it is an AfC submission is invisible and I think this is right. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 11:46, 8 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== New message box for recently created articles == |
|||
I have found a way of distinguishing between |
|||
*Submissions which are created in the wrong namespace, i.e. the ones discussed in the section above |
|||
*Submissions which have been accepted and moved in article space but haven't had the {{tl|AFC submission}} template removed yet |
|||
In the latter case, there is no reason why these should be going into [[:Category:Uncategorized Afc requests]]. I also thought it would be useful to have the links to preload the talk page and the author's talk page in these cases. Therefore I have created a message box {{tl|AFC submission/created}} which is designed to be displayed temporarily while the request is closed. I would welcome any comments or improvements to this. If there are any concerns, feel free to [[WP:BRD|revert and discuss]]! — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 13:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:I noticed this today, and I like it. It helps those of us who move the articles to mainspace remember that we need to remove the AFC template (I'm pretty forgetful so I sometimes need the reminder). And it's a nice notice for anyone doing recent changes/new page patrolling that these pages may not look quite right yet, but whoever's just moved it to the mainspace is likely in the process of cleaning up the tags and comments. <font color="Purple">[[User:Raven1977|Raven1977]]</font><sup><font color="Blue">[[User Talk:Raven1977|Talk to me]]</font></sup><sub><font color="Purple">[[Special:Contributions/Raven1977|My edits]]</font></sub> 22:23, 9 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks for the support. I would like a make a further suggestion. Occasionally, submissions attract a lot of discussion from reviewers and/or contributors, and this can get confusing as it sometimes is hard to see what is discussion and what is the actual article. I suggest that, in cases like this, we move the submission to the subjectspace (i.e. the project page) and then use the talk page for the discussion of the submission, which is what talk pages are for after all. Of course, we should have some way of drawing attention to this, when it has been done. This could probably be achieved using the submission banner. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 23:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::This sounds like a good idea. If a long discussion starts, sometimes I find it hard to see where the discussion ends and the prose for the article begins. [[User:FingersOnRoids|<span style="color:darkgreen">ƒingers</span><span style="color:gray"><b><sup>on</sup></b></span><b><span style="color:darkred"><sub>Roids</sub></span></b>]] 00:02, 14 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::I support the idea that these article submissions should probably have their own talk page. I'm not sure exactly where you are proposing these would be moved, however. Are you proposing that these submissions which end up having a bit of discussion are moved to a sub page of [[WP:Articles for Creation]], rather than keeping them at the current title of [[WP Talk:Articles for creation/page name]]? If I'm understanding you right, I think it's a good idea; although I would suggest making sure that this new area is accessible when looking at the category page for pending submissions. (And if I'm reading your suggestion incorrectly, please explain further what you mean by moving them to subjectspace. Thanks!) <font color="Purple">[[User:Raven1977|Raven1977]]</font><sup><font color="Blue">[[User Talk:Raven1977|Talk to me]]</font></sup><sub><font color="Purple">[[Special:Contributions/Raven1977|My edits]]</font></sub> 21:10, 14 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Sorry if I wasn't clear, but I think you've understood correctly. Every page has a talk page. At the moment we have been using just the talk pages and the subject page (that's the name of the other one) is not created. There is now a link on the toolbar ('''Move: Proj''') to move the submission to its subject page. Then the resulting redirect on the talk page can be removed and discussion begun. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 21:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
*(unindent, reply to MSGJ) I noticed that on the template today, and yeah I think it's a really good way to handle certain submissions that can otherwise get too cluttered with comments. <font color="Purple">[[User:Raven1977|Raven1977]]</font><sup><font color="Blue">[[User Talk:Raven1977|Talk to me]]</font></sup><sub><font color="Purple">[[Special:Contributions/Raven1977|My edits]]</font></sub> 17:39, 15 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Search Results - Article Creation Wizard == |
|||
I made a proposal at [[WP:VPR#Search Results - Article Creation Wizard]] to link from the Search Result page to the Article Creation Wizard. Comments there please. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] <sup>[[user talk:rd232|talk]]</sup> 12:11, 19 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Tweaks to the submission banner == |
|||
I've made a few edits to the onhold and declined banners. If a submission has been moved to the project page (see the thread higher up) then the banner will now say "Please check the talk page for discussion about this submission." See [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Dalibor Perković]] for an example of this. I've also removed the message "The reason can be seen below" if no reason is entered, because it occured to me that the reason might be on the talk page and below. Any comments welcome. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 19:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Well nobody commented, so I must assume it's working okay ;) — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 16:29, 21 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||