Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Articles for improvement/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13→Archive 15

Return to the Main Page

I think the last 8 weeks have demonstrated that this project can make dramatic improvements to articles. Tickle Me Elmo, National Library of China, Anubis, Java Man, Stir frying, C-4 (explosive), Jazz band and Vatican Library are all examples of the kinds of "WOW" improvements we needed. Now that we have proof that it can be done, it's time to start thinking about drafting a new proposal to return to the main page.

I'm going to break this into two sections, Housecleaning and Main Page Proposal. --NickPenguin(contribs) 05:56, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Housecleaning

Automation: Some parts of the project are automated. The 3-2-1 sructure is working, so TAFI/Schedule/new and TAFI/Holding area/new should replace the pages at TAFI/Schedule and TAFI/Holding area, and the code updated to reflect this. We could also automate the closing of the weekly votes, and generating the start of new votes each Sunday.

 Done Archives and search either don't work or are just not updated. This would be a good area for a bot to administer for us.

We can probably stop the bot from rotating the sections on the Nominations page, it is likely no longer necessary. It would also be nice to automate the Past Accomplishments page, even if it was a date range, start and finish links.

 Done Templates: The {{TAFI editor notice}}, {{TAFI project notice}} and {{Today's article for improvement invitation}}, I haven't seen used much. Are these still useful templates or can they be depreciated and deleted?

Membership list Is there a standard to resetting a membership list? Most of these people listed as project members have not been involed with this project in over a year. Maybe archive and send everyone a message asking them to readd if the would consider themselves a member?

 Done Project name: I think we would probably have to change the project name back to the singular, "Today's article for improvement", unless anyone has an idea for a way to expand the project without watering down results. One idea I had, we add an extra article as a monthly improvement, one that's a GA, Former GA, FAC or Former FA we are improving to FA status. My thoughts on this are mixed, I'd like t expand, but I don't want to split our focus. Or maybe having two articles would increase participation?

 Done Landing page: We would have to update our landing page WP:TAFI to look more like WP:TFA or WP:TFP

How easy would it be for a bot to add the {{TAFI project notice}} to relevant wikiproject pages? CSJJ104 (talk) 23:37, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
That is already happening most weeks, eg for this week: [1][2] - Evad37 [talk] 01:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Re templates: I have updated {{TAFI project notice}} to more closely match the bot version, so it can be used when the bot fails or additional projects should be notified. I'm not sure the editor notice is useful – while it could be similarly updated, most significant contributors, if still active, would probably be watching the relevant article or wikiproject talk page. - Evad37 [talk] 07:34, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Re membership: While many are not actively involved in TAFI, a lot of them are still signed up to the weekly selection notices. Not sure if this means they don't care and haven't bothered to remove themselves from the mailing list, or if they are just waiting for an exciting article to come along? - Evad37 [talk] 07:34, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
I can only speak for myself here, but I took a back seat around the time this project was seriously in trouble. The excitement at the beginning of the project was infectious, but aims were not being met. The article choices were... difficult. The refocusing of the project was, beyond doubt, excellent. I'm a bit sheepish, so a strong core of members with a welcoming attitude let's me join any particular TAFI that floats my boat, especially when people start making edits straight away. IMHO, the most successful choices have a spread across cultural and technical topics, are not constrained by geography or are easy to improve rapidly by copying of text. In terms of quality improvements, the latter is less important. The real predictor of article improvement (qci) appears to be the number of useful (non-reverted) edits per editor, and not total editors. Once that figure exceeds 5, an article usually increases in quality class. Tomásdearg92 (talk) 13:08, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
I agree that the old format left the project on shaky grounds; we spent so much time trying to organize the project that we spent almost no time improving articles. Now that everything seems to be clipping along at a good pace, maybe it would be a good time to reintroduce the project to older listed members, who may not be watching this page anymore. Most of them probably do not know about the new format, and other ideas we are working on. --NickPenguin(contribs) 16:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Re name: "This week's Article For Improvement" is probably more accurate whilst retaining the acronym TAFI, but the project pages are now sufficiently complicated/numerous that I wouldn't relish a mass pagemove. A rebranding of our messages and templates, without page moves, would certainly be an easier proposition. If we did want to expand, perhaps having two weekly articles at a time, but offset so that one runs from Monday to Sunday and another from (say) Thursday to Wednesday could be an option. - Evad37 [talk] 07:34, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
If the plural name is of no great concern, then we probably should just not worry about this. Plus we can keep it for possible future expansion. --NickPenguin(contribs) 16:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Updated Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Header to reflect current article selection process. This is subject to change in the future if we revert back to multiple articles per week (which is one of the reasons I support TAFI remaining what it originally stood for acronym-wise).--Coin945 (talk) 17:12, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Technical deletion request - done

Technical deletion request

There has been no oppisition to NickPenguin's proposal for TAFI/Holding area/new should replace the page at TAFI/Holding area, nor do I see why there would be any, so I am going to request WP:CSD#G6 technical deletion of the TAFI/Holding area redirects to facilitate the page moves. Note that TAFI/Schedule/new is just automation code (that should rarely need to be edited) transcluded onto TAFI/Schedule, so there isn't any need for pagemoves there, maybe just a {{navbar}} to provide view/edit links. - Evad37 [talk] 11:37, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Both issues  Done now - Evad37 [talk] 14:03, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Main Page Proposal

One thing I've noticed on the main page is that static content is unacceptable (except ITN, sort of). All content it rotated daily, and in the example of WP:TFL, items that run for a week are generally just shown one day in the week, in a full page width box.

This is the type of feature I think we should aim for, a full page width box, running once a week (probably Tuesdays since Monday is already taken by TFL). It would basically be an updated version of {{TAFI weekly selections notice}}. --NickPenguin(contribs) 05:56, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

I think one day a week, towards the beginning of the week, would be a good idea. The main page style would have to be used – I do have a couple of ideas, but have to see how they would work in practice. - Evad37 [talk] 07:40, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Here's something I just whipped up, what do you (NickPenguin and others) think?

Today's article for improvement

This week's article for improvement is:

Image

Previous selections:

Longshore drift · Navy

👍 Like NorthAmerica1000 07:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
I agree, I think that looks excellent. --NickPenguin(contribs) 12:17, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
👍 Like Jim Carter (from public cyber) 12:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
I really like this, and think it would fit right in on the main page. One comment, would scheduled selections perhaps be a better alternative to previous selections if the intention is to get more people involved into the future? CSJJ104 (talk) 21:30, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
That's a great idea, but we wouldn't want to show too far ahead, the final straw that got the project pulled off the main page last time was not having content scheduled properly in advance. That would be a tragic repetition. --NickPenguin(contribs) 21:49, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't think that's such a good idea because:
  • Previous selections fits in better with the other main page sections – TFA, TFP, TFL all show the previous three articles, and no future articles
  • It would look better (from stat's POV, or for arguments to keep TAFI on the MP) if the improvements to articles happened during their scheduled week, rather than beforehand
  • We don't want to split our attention between multiple articles, which was a significant failure in the previous main page implementation
  • Given the previous point, new/IP editors (if any) would be far better off being part of the collaboration, rather than being left on their own in an article which isn't the current TAFI.
  • As Nick points out, it reduces the amount of leeway we have if something goes wrong - Evad37 [talk] 01:56, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

The code for the content inside the box is now at Template:Today's articles for improvement. - Evad37 [talk] 08:16, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Choose the TAFI article for Week 37 of 2014

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Hello @Buster7, Northamerica1000, NickPenguin, and Esoxid:, @Kvng, Whiteghost.ink, Ypnypn, and Madalibi:, @Moswento, Kvng, Coin945, and Mark Miller:, @WaitingForConnection, Evad37, Buffbills7701, and Newyorkadam:, @Turn685, Victor falk, GiantSnowman, and Melody Lavender: @EMachine03, Simplysavvy, EuroCarGT, and CSJJ104: @Cloudz679, Iselilja, Khamar, and Finnusertop: @Tomásdearg92, CSJJ104, Davey2010, and Stuartyeates: @Gongshow, Jim Carter - Public, and Sophie means wisdom: and others (anyone can participate!):

The following articles have been randomly chosen from the holding area:

Please indicate, before 23:59 UTC Saturday, your top three preferences in order: your top pick first, then your second choice, and then your third. These will be allocated 3, 2, and 1 points respectively, and the most popular article (with the most points) will be added to the scheduled for week 37 of 2014. Articles that receive at least one vote will be returned to the holding area, while articles with no votes will be archived. On behalf of the TAFI project, --NickPenguin(contribs) 06:52, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Results:

Thanks to everyone for their votes, much appreciated. --NickPenguin(contribs) 07:41, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Best and Fairest from week 33

This week saw a bit of a challenging collaboration with Ghost story. After 7 days, we had turned this into this. It began with a quick copy paste from the relevant section on ghost, and continued with the integration of all of the examples into the Literature, Film and Television. We grouped the examples in the Literature together by genre/chronology, we also expanded the lede and History section, as well as a 4x increase in citations and a 3x increase in length. 7 new images (up from the original zero), and a sound file round out the improvements.

Many thanks to Evad37, Jim Carter - Public, Melody Lavender and CSJJ104, as well as David Condrey, Northamerica1000, Finnusertop, Horai 551, Kvng and SL93.

Well done once again everyone. Looking forward to another successful collaboration with History of West Africa. --NickPenguin(contribs) 00:48, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Very well done!--Mark Miller (talk) 05:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Automation

Per discussion further up the page, the project could do with some more automation, i.e. bot tasks. I have recently updated the Automation (previously named Templates) page to include details of the current bot tasks (none of which are working perfectly, but that's another matter). Please comment on the following potential bot tasks (or suggest others), which could then be requested at WP:BOTREQ. - Evad37 [talk] 09:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Manage weekly votes

1) Set up the weekly vote on a Monday (after closing previous vote):

  • 10 articles to be randomly selected from the numbered list in the holding area
  • New message posted on TAFI talk page, with:
    • {{Anchor|Vote}}
    • ping list
    • intro text
    • the 10 articles (moved out of holding area, and into this new message)
    • instructions

Notes: Templates for intro message and pings could be created. Very important that {{anchor|Vote}} is moved from old vote section to new vote section (it is linked from various templates). - Evad37 [talk] 09:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

I think this would be an ideal thing to automate. I have put in a bot request but it has so far gone unreplied to. If @Theopolisme: continued to be unavailable I think we may be forced to disable his bot and force a reaction from him. --NickPenguin(contribs) 08:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
I think Theo is actually quite busy in real life and/or spending little time on-wiki, so I'm not sure disabling the bot tasks would actually get a positive reaction (or perhaps any reaction at all?) - Evad37 [talk] 05:50, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

2) Close weekly vote:

  • Each participant provides (or can instructed to provide) links to their top 3 articles. The first is worth 3 points, the second 2 points, the third 1 point. In accordance with this, tally the points for each of the 10 articles, and display the results below the vote.
  • The article(s) with the highest number of points to be marked as "to be scheduled"
  • Articles at or below a certain number of points (currently 0, but might be changed) are archived to the holding area archive
  • Articles above that threshold, but not with the highest number of points, will be returned to the list in the holding area
  • Mark section with {{closed}}, and remove {{Anchor|Vote}}

Notes: Instructions could specify that exact article titles/links must be used, like how nominations page says votes must be bolded. - Evad37 [talk] 09:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

I think the automated closing is good, but the vote tallying would likely be easier to count by hand. I could see the tallying being difficult to automate. --NickPenguin(contribs) 08:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
It might be difficult, I'm not really sure – I suppose we'll have to see what the bot makers say. In any case, it would probably be better to split the requested task into 2) Close vote (Mark section with {{closed}}, and remove {{Anchor|Vote}}) and have the rest of it as an optional task, if it isn't too hard to code.

Manage Accomplishments page

  • Add a new row to Accomplishments page each week, with as much data as a bot can determine – at least year/week number and article title, more if possible.

Note: Template Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Accomplishments/row available, documentation there describes data required. Before/after prose size might also be a useful measurement. - Evad37 [talk] 09:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

This would be another ideal item to automate. --NickPenguin(contribs) 08:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Support. NorthAmerica1000 06:19, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Send out weekly user notification

Note: I'm not sure if bots can use the mass message, or if a bot would need to. - Evad37 [talk] 09:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

I think automatically messaging WikiProjects related to the article would be useful, but project participants get pings already for the votes. I know I get a talk page notification every Monday,and I find that useful, although I think it might be courtesy from EuroCarGT and not strictly automated. --NickPenguin(contribs) 08:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
The existing talk page notification on Mondays is what I meant. Currently, a Mass Message Sender/admin (EuroCarGT been doing a great job for a while now, I was doing it a lot initially) sends the message each week semi-automatically, using Special:MassMessage (an interface to send the same message to everyone on a specially formatted list – ours is here). Since the message is actually just the substitution of Template:TAFI weekly selections notice, this seems like a task that could be fully automated by using a bot. - Evad37 [talk] 05:50, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
I support using a bot to automatically send out weekly user notifications. This will streamline the process more, and automation will solve a potential problem of the message not being sent manually, which can occur when editors become busy with other matters, etc. NorthAmerica1000 06:19, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Article reassessment

We need to update the article grades for certain TAFI selected articles. Unfortunately the WikiProjects in which Animatronics are listed are inactive, some members are still active on this site so asking them could be an option. Just to note. ///EuroCarGT 05:05, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

We could start our own assessment process, record the before/after assessments in the {{Former TAFI}} banner, and copy over the assessment to inactive or semi-active projects' banners. - Evad37 [talk] 05:26, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
WP:MILHIST has quite the advanced assessment process which gets pretty consistent results. Maybe we could copy some of their model. --NickPenguin(contribs) 12:20, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
I've started a sandbox/draft version of a TAFI Assessment page at Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Assessment - Evad37 [talk] 13:23, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Wow, that was quick. That looks really good, and I especially like the part about assessing before as well as after. Sometimes assessments are just totally out to lunch. --NickPenguin(contribs) 13:29, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Well, most of it was a copy–paste – I still have to fix up/remove some references to MILHIST - Evad37 [talk] 13:34, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Good stuff! I would suggest using switch templates for the template so it could be easily filled. ///EuroCarGT 15:44, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 Done (I think this is what you meant, please elaborate if it isn't): Filling out the B-class checklist will now automatically assign B-class or C-class when the relevant criteria are met. I've also added a separate checklist for the pre-improvement assessment. - Evad37 [talk] 02:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
I added the Assessment link to the tabbed header. --NickPenguin(contribs) 04:18, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Looks good. I think an improvement would be to include information about A-class, Good-class and Featured-class articles on the Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Assessment page, so that features are listed. NorthAmerica1000 06:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
plus Added to the Criteria section, and icons added to the links in the Introduction section - Evad37 [talk] 07:42, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

The new template is now live at {{Former TAFI}}, and the Assessment page has been updated. Now all we need are assessors! Please add your name to the list on that page if you are willing to assess articles. - Evad37 [talk] 09:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

👍 Like Really nice. Lookin' good in the neighborhood. NorthAmerica1000 09:43, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
GG! ///EuroCarGT 00:31, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Is the intention to assess every article before and after, or is the pre-improvement check list only if articles have already been checked? CSJJ104 (talk) 21:17, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
The intention is to assess every article's before-improvement and after-improvement state. - Evad37 [talk] 00:47, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
I was Bold and added the template with my assessment of the current state of History of West Africa hoping it might provide a guide for improvements. Let me no if this is a problem. CSJJ104 (talk) 17:55, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
That's not a bad idea... I'll look into programming the template to display more appropriate messages during the week of the collaboration - Evad37 [talk] 05:30, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
 Done - Evad37 [talk] 00:07, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Redesigned TAFI main page

I have been experimenting with a redesign for the TAFI main page (WP:TAFI), see User:Evad37/Sandbox 3. I've tried to make it simpler and friendly, and reuse the content of the proposed main page box (as per WP:TFA, WP:TFL, WP:TFP). - Evad37 [talk] 07:43, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

That looks a lot better. You are really good at the design of these elements. --NickPenguin(contribs) 11:01, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
One matter is that the File:Writing Magnifying.PNG image atop at the right is used by the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. NorthAmerica1000 14:25, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Oh, I just took the image from {{Former TAFI}} (it's been in there for a couple of years). I'm sure there's other icons we could use instead (for both the template and redesigned main page). - Evad37 [talk] 00:11, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
How about this image which shows collaborative editing (3 pens) and improvemet (+ symbol)? - Evad37 [talk] 08:26, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
👍 Like Nice find. NorthAmerica1000 10:25, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Choose the TAFI article for Week 38 of 2014

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Hello @AFI ping list, and others (anyone can participate!):

The following articles have been randomly chosen from the holding area:

Please indicate, before 23:59 UTC Saturday, your top three preferences in order: your top pick first, then your second choice, and then your third. These will be allocated 3, 2, and 1 points respectively, and the most popular article (with the most points) will be added to the scheduled for week 38 of 2014. Articles that receive at least one vote will be returned to the holding area, while articles with no votes will be archived. On behalf of the TAFI project, --NickPenguin(contribs) 07:50, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Results:

Result was Ancient Roman architecture, thanks everyone. --NickPenguin(contribs) 00:00, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Main wikiproject page copyedit

Is the header line Project Organisation spelled correctly on the main page? It was just bugging me.. I guess organisation can be spelled either with a z or with an s. I was itching to copyedit the page but figured maybe I should check first.. David Condrey (talk) 02:26, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Not a typo... Unless there are national ties to a particular variety of English, any form is acceptable on Wikipedia. But perhaps there is an alternate word spelled the same in American and British/British-based English? - Evad37 [talk] 02:53, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Organization with an s is British (common), Australia, New Zealand, meanwhile elsewhere it's with a z. The section was written by Evad37, he or she is Australian so he or she used organization with a s. ///EuroCarGT 02:57, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
| A cup of jo.. :) David Condrey (talk) 04:18, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
According to that spreadsheet, Canadian English is the same as British English, or we are both just as sarcastic. --NickPenguin(contribs) 13:48, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Report tool

Just come across this tool for automatically compiling reports about state of articles. Would point out it's not always up to date, but still useful. CSJJ104 (talk) 19:09, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

That is an excellent tool, it would be incredibly useful. Especially with articles that already have lots of content but might be difficult to work through manually. --NickPenguin(contribs) 20:09, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Nice find. Thanks for sharing. David Condrey (talk) 03:23, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
That tool and some others are listed on TAFI's main page, but if you find any other useful tools, you can add them there. - Evad37 [talk] 03:31, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Did you know nomination for Solar activity

ALT hooks welcome, please post on the review linked above - Evad37 [talk] 10:14, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Choose the TAFI article for Week 39 of 2014

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Hello @AFI ping list, and others (anyone can participate!):

The following articles have been randomly chosen from the holding area:

Please indicate, before 23:59 UTC Saturday, your top three preferences in order: your top pick first, then your second choice, and then your third. These will be allocated 3, 2, and 1 points respectively, and the most popular article (with the most points) will be added to the scheduled for week 39 of 2014. Articles that receive at least one vote will be returned to the holding area, while articles with no votes will be archived. On behalf of the TAFI project, --NickPenguin(contribs) 00:11, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Results:

Result was Pizza, thanks everyone. --NickPenguin(contribs) 01:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

TAFI in University of Washington article Editing Beyond Articles: Diversity & Dynamics of Teamwork in Open Collaborations

"Several recently-founded social and community support projects address issues related to the editor decline. These projects employ different strategies to recruit new editors and retain existing ones.Today’s Article for Improvement(TAFI) (f.2012) organizes Collaboration of the Day, which functions like a Wikipedia-wide Collaboration of the Week[38]. Project contributors select an article to collaboratively boost to Featured Article status from a list of proposed collaborations. While improving article quality is one of the primary functions of conventional WikiProjects, TAFI differs from the norm not just in its broader cope, but in its goals: “The main motive was to create a good enough framework for all editors and collaborators to come in... It was as much of a "Rope in the newcomers" thing as "Improve the important articles" [p1]"

"Inviting newcomers to work collaboratively on improving an article alongside more experienced editors who are there to provide friendly guidance and constructive criticism provides an opportunity for direct mentorship, which has been shown to be successful but rare on Wikipedia[26]. As of mid-2013 TAFI members are working to feature the current Collaboration of the Day on the front page of Wikipedia in an effort to convert Wikipedia readers to editors."

"Many members of the Wikipedia community have suspected for years that their shrinking community is partially due to new editors having difficulty learning the ropes and having few opportunities to interact with the Wikipedia community in positive ways, a theory supported by recent research[14][22]. The creation of projects like Today’s Article for Improvement and Editor Retention demonstrates how the WikiProject model for group collaboration can be adapted to address these emerging community concerns."

"As Wikipedia’s social climate has evolved, new barriers to participation have arisen. Many alternative WikiProjects such as TAFI and Editor Retention, focus on newly-recognized community concerns such as the decline in retention of new editors and the shortening productive lifespan of established editors. The relevance of these newer alternative projects to the community’s current needs may be part of the reason why the level of activity within the set of alternative WikiProjects has increased over the past six years while activity within conventional WikiProjects, and within Wikipedia as a whole, have decreased."

Excerpts of the paper that are relevant to TAFI[3]

 

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Coin945 (talk • contribs) 04:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I spy and Marco Polo (game)

I decided to have a crack at one of our TAFI article that is currently in the holding area: I spy. This led me onto another kids game called Marco Polo - something I used to play when I was younger all the time. Any help in ironing out the creases would be invaluable. :)--Coin945 (talk) 04:20, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

@NickPenguin: since we were just talking about this, I figured I'd ping you in. :)--Coin945 (talk) 07:22, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Request involving TAFI articles

Please see Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Request involving TAFI articles.--Coin945 (talk) 07:25, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Best and Fairest from week 34 - History of West Africa

Our collaboration on History of West Africa began with this, and 7 days of hard work turned it into this.

Improvements included a large copy of material from History of Africa, which added a large amount of content to the pre-colonial kingdom/empire section. Other improvements included a significantly improved lede, a much improved lede image and caption, geographic and genetic background sections, improved prehistoric section, added health section including information on AIDS, Ebola virus and famine, as well as a cuisine section. In total there was a 5.5x increase in length (14k to 80k), a huge increase in citations (2 versus 103) and an increase from 5 to 17 images.

Many thanks go out to @David Condrey:, @Northamerica1000:, @Evad37:, @Finnusertop:, and @Melody Lavender:, as well as thanks to @Jim Carter - Public:, @Tomásdearg92:, @EuroCarGT:, @Matt Heard:, @MrWooHoo:, @CSJJ104:, @Comingdeer:, @Cloudz679:, @Prisencolinensinainciusol:, @KConWiki:, @Spirit of Eagle:, @Macofe:, @TheQ Editor:, and @Ɱ:.

With that accomplishment, I would like to ask a general question about content copying. Certainly it is an easy to beef up an article, and in some past cases (like Life sciences), essentially the only easy way to improve articles. However I am worried it may stunt general participation. I imagine it is easier for new(er) editors to add to a blank slate, and more experienced editors to come around after and clean up content. At the same time, this article had both the largest number of edits and unique participants to date (except April Foods Day with vandals), and History of West Africa was certainly one of our most successful collaborations. Was this because of the subject? What are everyone's thoughts on copying content to improve articles? --NickPenguin(contribs) 11:57, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't know, it seems hard to predict what will be a good TAFI. At the start of the week I thought we might struggle with History of West Africa, and yet it turned out to be one of our best collaborations to date. Re copying: while it might dissuade some contributors, it might be quite good for others who like copyediting and gnomish edits to make a consistent, coherent, well-formatted article (as articles copied from are likely to differ somewhat in styles or other aspects). The other point to remember is that different articles that cover the same topic (in varying levels of detail) should be synchronised and should not contradict each other – copying and/or summarising other articles probably helps with this. - Evad37 [talk] 14:52, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Well fwiw, I wasn't a fan of Ravens in Native American mythology from the outset, but it was voted in so I'm not arguing. I guess we'll see how we go, but I don't feel compelled to improve it.--Coin945 (talk) 19:43, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
I am curious to see how that one turns out, my moving of the article may make it easier to improve, but it is a relatively narrow subject. --NickPenguin(contribs) 02:08, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Many thanks to you, too, NickPenguin (talk · contribs), for your tireless work behind the scenes that makes this wonderful project so successful! --Melody Lavender (talk) 15:28, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Much appreciated Melody, everyone has been doing a really fantastic job these last few months, it is good to see the project having regular successes. --NickPenguin(contribs) 17:54, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

TAFI star being repurposed on Wikivoyage

Just an interesting little tidbit that I thought you might like @Mark Miller:. Wikivoyage has repurposed our star to indicate B/C-class articles that have Star potential.--Coin945 (talk) 04:58, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

And it's also used on the Chinese Wikivoyage: voy:zh:Template:Starpotential - Evad37 [talk] 05:24, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
👍 Like.--Mark Miller (talk) 19:27, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Also 👍 Like! NorthAmerica1000 20:38, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
👍 Davey2010 likes this. 19:17, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Best and Fairest from week 35 - Solar activity

This was a particularly tremendous accomplishment, Solar activity started as essentially a blank slate (this) and it turned into an extremely mature and developed article (this). At the start it was a disambiguation page, less than 100 words, now its just short of being 70 kb in length with almost 80 citations. A lot of the improvement involved copying content from some of the related articles, such as types of activity the effect on climate sections. But, there was also a significant amount of research in the new Observation history section, which uses a dozen unique citations. We also added 20 images, provided some background information about the Sun. It's been nominated for a DYK, and with a few more citations, it could easily be nominated for a Good Article.

Many thanks go out to @Evad37:, @Northamerica1000:, @Khamar:, @Melody Lavender:, @David Condrey:, as well as to @Finnusertop:, @EuroCarGT:, @Tomásdearg92:, @Afernand74:, @MirrorFreak:, @Hedwig in Washington:, @Bgwhite:, @Billinghurst:. Great job everyone, this one turned out really good. --NickPenguin(contribs) 14:13, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

We've Gone Global!

I'm probably super late to the party, but I just noticed that we have TAFI projects on two other Wikipedias!! (Vietnamese and Hindi). And the Hindi one is actually pretty successful (They call their TAFI "Sudhalek"):

Their main page shows some serious article-class improvements. I'm so happy right now. :)--Coin945 (talk) 04:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Wow, that is really awesome news! --NickPenguin(contribs) 04:19, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Cool stuff, nice to see positive project expand! ///EuroCarGT 04:44, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Wow, I'm impressed! Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 06:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

First contact

Spreading franchise

I think that would be a great idea. I am actually surprised that no one from the other wikis has come by and mentioned they've been working on this. I would really like to be able to help the other languages with this, that would do wonders to increasing the awareness of the project's successes. --NickPenguin(contribs) 14:18, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
I completely agree. This project transcends any specific article topic, and is really something nice and collaborative. It is something all Wikipedias should have.--Coin945 (talk) 14:33, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
I've posted a short pitch about TAFI on various Wikipedias. Now, we wait... :)--Coin945 (talk) 19:24, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Which wikis did you post the messages on? --NickPenguin(contribs) 01:03, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
I went to List of Wikipedias, and posted messages on maybe, the 50 largest Wikipedias?--Coin945 (talk) 05:52, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

TAFI Embassy

I've started an  Embassy section on our main TAFI page, please add projects discovered or created to the list there. - Evad37 [talk] 16:27, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Note the versions of TAFI from other languages is also in the "Languages" section on the left sidebar. Also see here for other "Collaboration of the week" versions. (Mostly inactive though) https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3906662#sitelinks-wikipedia--Coin945 (talk) 07:40, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
I know, I just thought that the Langauges link can be a bit hard to miss, and it might be nice to give them a more prominent mention, with their own project names rather than just the language. It also provides a space to put links to other projects, eg if a TAFI-like project gets started on Wikivoyage, or other wikis. I look into expanding the list from the Wikidata page later. - Evad37 [talk] 08:12, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Great addition to the project's main page, and encourages inter-wiki collaboration. NorthAmerica1000 23:09, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Off topic help request

The English Wikipedia has no jurisdiction over what happens at the Wikimedia Commons.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:22, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Off topic, sorry. Do we have any admins of Wikipedia Commons in the group? I'm trying to resolve a personal matter where an admin as blocked my commons account and started deleting all of my contributions and my unblock request is only be reviewed by te very same admin whom I'm disputing. Not sure what other action I can take at this point so trying to find assistance. [4] David Condrey (talk) 22:03, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with Commons, but I think @Northamerica1000: might be active there. --NickPenguin(contribs) 22:27, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I've been dealing with this b.s. all day. and have not gotten anywhere. I'm about to the point I'm just going to say f*ck Wikipedia all together if I can't get this resolved. This is really freakin screwed up and I can't seem to get any help. David Condrey (talk) 05:25, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
(after reviewing all the evidence) That's messed up... :( I've heard rumors about the dick-pic epidemic before, and it's sad that a group of power-abusive administrators are defending them all. I can see how the bulk DR could be seen as trolling due to many of them apparently being encyclopedic, but the actions taken in response to that have been very juvenile indeed. I sincerely hope it all turns out okay. :)--Coin945 (talk) 08:32, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Stated a discussion here for you. Hopefully they will unblock you at the very least to allow you to speak for yourself without requiring a messenger.--Coin945 (talk) 17:17, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Choose the TAFI article for Week 40 of 2014

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Hello @AFI ping list, and others (anyone can participate!):

The following articles have been randomly chosen from the holding area:

Please indicate, before 23:59 UTC Saturday, your top three preferences in order: your top pick first, then your second choice, and then your third. These will be allocated 3, 2, and 1 points respectively, and the most popular article (with the most points) will be added to the scheduled for week 40 of 2014. Articles that receive at least one vote will be returned to the holding area, while articles with no votes will be archived. On behalf of the TAFI project, --NickPenguin(contribs) 01:51, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Results:

Result was International airport, thanks everyone. --NickPenguin(contribs) 03:19, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Other Wikipedias

General thoughts on similar projects

As more and more of these examples appear from other Wikipedias, I notice two general things: they have a smaller, more focused community of editors, and projects like ours have failed to last. I'm wondering what differentiates us from those attempts, as well as previously failed attempts on enWiki. I suspect they fail to attract regular participation, which is something that our weekly voting system corrects. Every 7 days there is at least some simple project activity that inevitably encourages other project participation. If other wikis were to try to start a group like this, I think the weekly voting would be important, as well as regular use of the ping system. --NickPenguin(contribs) 22:42, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

What can we do to help those Wikipedias that have shown interest? We should respond asap before the buzz wears down.--Coin945 (talk) 13:45, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Basically we should be able to offer basic structure (project page, nominations page, schedule page and templates, and possibly holding area). Automation wise, they should get copies of the scripts that automate schedule, holding area and nominations page, as well as the ping list which is very important. If they need a jump start, we should also make an effort to help find a bunch of pages needing improvement, probably by going through our vital lists and clicking through to that wiki's pages. This could tie into an existing translation project, we might encourage them to merge the two ideas.
If we want to make this easy for them, we should come up with an Embassy Package somewhere on our page, with links and documentation on how to start a project on another wiki. --NickPenguin(contribs) 14:46, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

French

France already has a small TAFI-like section on their Village pump (Le Bistro), a short list of articles which should be expanded (or created) "which seems to be enough for the moment". If they wanted to expand this into a full fledged project, we could potentially assist them.

They also have a similar project that is restricted to city articles. I think a project hat is open to any type of article from any topic/subject is more valuable though...--Coin945 (talk) 16:27, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Romanian

Romanian wiki has this project which has similar goals to us, which is interiwkied to the now-dead Wikipedia:Collaboration of the week. We can work together with this very successful page.--Coin945 (talk) 13:45, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

It is interesting to note that after the 1 year mark, the Romanian project expanded to 3 articles per week. Their rationale was the same as ours, more articles on a variety of topics gives a better chance to give editors something to work on. They are currently at 4 articles per week. I would have to look closer to see their success rate. --NickPenguin(contribs) 14:27, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Andrei: "Thanks for letting us know. We already have something like that — we call it "Project of the Week", and it includes three or four articles every week, highlighted in sitenotice. Our objectives are usually less ambitious than going for GA status, but so far it has led to significant improvements of important topics. Feel free to interwiki-link to the project page (via Wikidata or whatever works)."--Coin945 (talk) 09:12, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Indonesia

The indonesian wikipedia has this, but it is dead. We can help them to reinvigorate it, or to set up TAFI there with our templates.--Coin945 (talk) 13:45, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Esperanto

On the Esperanto Wikipedia is similar project eo:Vikipedio:Kunlaboraĵo de la semajno (Collaboration of the week) but it is low active. It seems to be suficient for eowiki (IMO). --KuboF (talk) 14:02, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Malay

The have a similar project but it's dead. They are interested to see how we can assist them. ("I'm wondering though what sort of help you're offering? Framework, automation, or something else?").--Coin945 (talk) 15:47, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

...Aurora... wrote "If anybody else reply here, then there is hope. Otherwise, I guess nobody is interested or has the time to join. Alas, we're facing the "active editor retention problem" too. "--Coin945 (talk) 13:45, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Chinese

Currently has this page. Due to bad Google translation, I am not sure exactly what it does, but Bluedeck said it was their current method of article expansion.--Coin945 (talk) 16:06, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

I was saying that we have very few contributors unlike the English Wikipedia. Also this is my first time hearing TAI, perhaps more publication could be made. When there are very few active contributors, it would be difficult to manage it daily or even weekly. 124.197.102.166 (talk) 07:17, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Also, Bluedeck was asking if that could be considered one. Well, this page is a subpage of the Chinese corresponding Wikipedia:Collaboration of the week, but it has nothing got to do with weekly collaboration; it meant "Article quality improvement project", while the subpage mentioned is a task force to improve vital articles. Do contact me here with you wish more clarification on Chinese. 124.197.102.166 (talk) 07:22, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

"But the Chinese Wikipedia contributors few, like the English Wikipedia so difficult ...... - 124.197.102.166 (Message) September 4, 2014 (four) 07:14 (UTC)"

"Expand basic entry should still ongoing, is a basic entry expand WP: ISA page, the most recent change is a matter of three months ago - Wolfch (Message) - DC12, basic entry September 4, 2014 (four ) 09:28 (UTC)"

Simple Wikipedia

Goblin wrote: "This is pretty much how our GA and WP:VGA work already - at least in theory. Very little, if any, of our "better content" has gotten to that stage without involvement from most of the community here, so I can't see much merit in introducing yet another scheme here. That said, I wish you the continued best of luck at enwiki."

I explained how TAFI is different to WP:GA, but I trust Goblin's judgement. If they decide in the future this is something they might be interested in, they know where to find us. :)--Coin945 (talk) 16:18, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm an editor there and have tried unsuccessfully to create similar copy-editing projects there but because of the lack of editors that are currently contributing, projects become "forgotten" and therefore, they no longer accept any projects. Best, jonatalk to me 13:16, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Slovenia

Yerpo wrote: "Hi, thanks for the notification. We've been quite active at a similar project, the 1000 vital articles expansion drive, whose dynamics is more suited to our small and diverse editor community. Personally, I don't believe that creating an administrative burden (article selection process), adding time pressure (one week) and reducing the eligible subjects to one at a time would work here."--Coin945 (talk) 16:22, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Bosnian

WizardOfOz wrote: "What is the goal? To have the same featured articles on each wikipedia? This is something that needs a community decision in such small community as our is. And if, what does it mean in collaborative manner? Adapting of a kind of teams for each project or waht?"--Coin945 (talk) 16:35, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Tamil

From what Google Translate garbled out, Tamil sounds keen.

தினேஷ்குமார் பொன்னுசாமி said: "Tenkaciyare Thanks! The program will be useful to us. If you need help communicating their ideas is known by other users."--Coin945 (talk) 16:44, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Ravi: "The joint venture will be a contributor for us is the resource that corresponds to the week . And the last , has been suspended for lack of sufficient contributions . You can also try to re-."--Coin945 (talk) 16:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Piedmontese

I have no idea what this says but Dragonòt sounds angry. Maybe my message was interpreted as foreign language spam...

"Qualsëssìa ròba ò anformassion che a-j fasèissa da manca, che as fasa pura gnun problema a contaté j'aministrador, che i soma ambelessì a pòsta. Mersì e bon travaj!".--Coin945 (talk) 16:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Norwegian (Bokmål/Riksmål)

Ooo86 wrote: "This reminds me of Wikipedia: Today's volunteers. There was never really any great and lasting activity there?".

I explained that if they wanted a similar project reinstated, we could help them with that. --Coin945 (talk) 17:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Spanish

Ganímedes listed a bunch of Spanish links that would be useful to people wanting to improve the Wikipedia: Wikiproyecto: Translation of feature articles, Wikiproyecto: Atrad, Wikiproyecto: Reviewers, Wikiproyecto: Articles missing, Wikiproyecto: Renewal of featured items.

(S)he noted "The bad news is that they are virtually inactive, so do not know how many might be interested in your proposal. However, I appreciate the warning and see the warning in the pages of item selection / good attachments and Featured Articles Candidates."--Coin945 (talk) 05:36, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Korean

Min1gjs said: "I think the comment you to run in the Korean Wiki Project TAFI, the project seems like a good post to make up the number of personnel by the gate to the old document TAFI project."

So there is already a dead TAFI-esque project there? And they would like it to be reinvigorated?--Coin945 (talk) 13:45, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Dutch

Capaccio Capaccio wrote: "We already have a comparable project (running since 2012): Wikipedia:Artikelen van de dag ("Articles of the day"), in which we daily present 5 articles that should be created and 5 articles that need expansion/improvement."

Scope of Project Proposal

I'd like to open a proposal for discussion related to the scope of articles that are nominated and approved to be included in the Article for Improvement project. This may only be my personal opinion but I feel as though several articles that are in the queue are too broad and lack the scope necessary to ever really be a good article. I looked through the current queue and for example: Home page, Island, Hero, Ignorance, Court, Sport, Company, Audience, Craft, Land, Job. Each of these seems to be would be better suited for a dictionary rather than an encyclopedic article. They have no real scope. Land is land.. a job is a job.. everyone has one. I just don't see the point in these articles really even existing. Again this is just my opinion but wanted to mention it.. perhaps other people disagree or feel the same way, I dunno. If I work on an article I just prefer it to be of some educational value and ideally of some personal interest though obviously that's not expected and can't be expected that every article will interest everyone. Hopefully the articles could all be articles that are substantial, of some educational value, and have a potential to become good articles. David Condrey (talk) 03:36, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

I think there's more encyclopedic merit in these broad-concept articles than some of our very limited-scope FAs, such as individual TV episodes. Some of the examples you give are actually WP:CORE or WP:VITAL articles, i.e. among the most important topics to have great articles on. And to give a counter-example (that was actually a TAFI article): The sea is the sea, what more could you possibly want to know? - Evad37 [talk] 05:58, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Best and Fairest from week 36 - Raven Tales

At the outset, this looked like it was going to prove to be a challenging collaboration, with such a narrow subject matter. However, it actually turned out quite well, starting like this and turning into this. The article started with a generic introduction and just three legends. By the end we had an excellent lede, organized groups of legends from 21 different indigenous groups, 7 images, and 52 new citations.

Many thanks to @David Condrey:, @Finnusertop:, @Melody Lavender:, @Northamerica1000:, and @Stuartyeates:, as well as @Evad37:, @Ceosad:, @EuroCarGT:, @Ryan115:, @CSJJ104:, @Cloudz679:, @Arjayay:, @Xezbeth:, and @Mogism:. Great job from everyone involved. --NickPenguin(contribs) 04:22, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Fantastic job everyone! I was absolutely enthralled by these stories and I'm happy that we've given Wikipedia such a great article on them. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 11:42, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
It could also be nominated for a DYK, although we may have missed the 7 day window. --NickPenguin(contribs) 14:46, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Having put so much into this article last week I really grew an interest in the subject and am continuing to work on it even though TAFI has moved on to another article. I actually just submitted it for peer review a little while ago to get a broader critique and hopefully polish it into a featured article. (haven't done a peer review before, hopefully I did it correctly) David Condrey (talk) 02:40, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I can continue to improve Raven Tales if there's something you need help with. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 14:49, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Since people herein and in an above discussion have discussed continued collaboration after the weekly selection has occurred, I've added the Article collaboration tab back to the project's tabbed header that appears atop the project's pages, which appears in the tabs as Further collaboration. I've added the Raven Tales article to it for starters. Feel free to use this space to coordinate and collaborate! NorthAmerica1000 15:24, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Should we put an arbitrary time period on articles on the AC page, so as to keep it fresh? Or should we just let them run their course. I am hesitant to keep them there in perpetuity. --NickPenguin(contribs) 15:46, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
An archive can easily be created for the page to place discussions at after ongoing collaborations have reached their conclusion. NorthAmerica1000 15:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I think Animatronics may qualify for being added to that new tab that you created for further collaboration if you'd like to add it. It received it's first review in the DYK project today and I made some minor adjustments (added further references) in regard to the comments. It was a positive review. Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Animatronics. David Condrey (talk) 03:21, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
@NickPenguin: I think a month would be good. Improve for a week, touch up and continue improving for a month, and then archive it from the continued collaboration page. David Condrey (talk) 03:23, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

I just added the Animatronics article to the project's Further collaboration page. The Further collaboration page is also a useful place to post notices/updates about the project's DYK entries, which I have also added there. NorthAmerica1000 01:47, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_improvement/Archive_11&oldid=1137402226"