Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests

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

Glory (1989 film)[edit]

A quick question. If an editor's name displays in red should they be considered the same as an IP? If so, on Glory (1989 film) the requester has made only four very minor edits to a caption in the article. I wonder then if the request should be denied? Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:54, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

No; that was apparently a temporary problem which has not recurred (yet :-)). NeoBatfreak is one of our regular "customers", and I just link to their talk page. We have no contribution requirement for requests, although it can certainly be taken into account when deciding to accept a request (FWIW, I don't). All the best, Miniapolis 14:39, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Some editors choose to have non-existent User pages, not even redirecting them to their talk pages. It's beyond me why someone would choose to be unhelpful in this way, but there is no rule against it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:39, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks to you both. I thought I recognized the monicker.Twofingered Typist (talk) 18:24, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Red-linked article requested by now-blocked sock[edit]

The Akbarian Bengali calendar article was requested by a now-blocked sock on April 27; the article was renamed, the redirect deleted, and there's currently about it being a fork of another article. I imagine the best thing would be to delete the request, but I don't know whether archiving should be involved or not. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:03, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

My instinct says disregard the sockpuppet's request and delete it. Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:08, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
The redlink obviously makes a copyedit request moot :-); I'll decline and archive it for the record. All the best, Miniapolis 17:40, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Rahian-e Noor[edit]

LouisAragon Hello, LouisAragon - I was just looking through the list of requests at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, and looking at some of the articles, and I came across Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests#Rahian-e Noor, requested by Saff V., who says it may be nominated soon for DYK. I clicked on the link to look at the article and saw a tag that made me think this article might need more work than just a copy-edit. I wonder if you could take a look at it and let me know how close the article is to being well written enough that a simple copy-edit could be done. If you think it really needs work by a person who could read the original article and polish the English article, do you have time to do that? If you do, perhaps the copy-edit request should be put on hold for a while. Saff V., is there any rush? Miniapolis, you might be interested in this.  – Corinne (talk) 01:31, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Definitely too rough a translation to copyedit, IMO, especially for DYK. I think we should decline until the dedicated folks at WP:PNT can make it intelligible. All the best, Miniapolis 02:02, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Well, it seems Paradoxasauruser has copy-edited it. It is now archived.  – Corinne (talk) 02:54, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
In copy-editing, I did read sources (some were in English) to strengthen the body of the article in addition to grammatical and syntactical fixes - I'm not convinced all of the references are top-notch, but I feel the major ones are at least functional. I chose not to remove the rough translation template as I'm not a native Persian speaker and I didn't want to unilaterally judge my own edits as accurate and intelligible to the average English-language reader, but I do feel they are, if anyone else wants to put an eye to them. -- Paradoxasauruser (talk) 03:26, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Schadenfreude[edit]

Since the article expansion by the requester was a copyvio (since removed), there now seems to be no reason for a copyedit (especially since our backlog is up to two months) and we can decline this. Thoughts? All the best, Miniapolis 20:23, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree. I had a quick scan of the article and it appears to be in reasonable shape for the most part. Twofingered Typist (talk) 22:10, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Switching places for my entries[edit]

Hi, I was once told it was ok to switch the places of one's listed entries here as long as I asked on the talk page. Would it be ok if I swapped the entries for Istiodactylus and Guadeloupe amazon, since the latter has already gotten a GA review now, and will therefore be closer to an eventual FA nomination? FunkMonk (talk) 11:08, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

That is OK. People do that occasionally. Please ensure that you do not modify anyone else's requests. The format of this page can be tricky sometimes. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:52, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll do it now. FunkMonk (talk) 14:37, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Datone Jones[edit]

Since requester UCLAgirl623 has received an indefinite checkuser block, I've declined and archived this article. Miniapolis 00:21, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Indian Navy[edit]

I took a look at Indian Navy to see if it was something I would like to copy-edit, and I saw several alarming tags at the top of the article. Is this article still in flux? Do the tags themselves invite continuous editing? What do you recommend, Jonesey95?  – Corinne (talk) 02:19, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

It looks like one editor, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, has been doing a ton of work on the page in the past two weeks. I'd say check with them to see if they plan to make further substantial changes soon. Tdslk (talk) 02:44, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
I marked it as "on hold" on the Requests page for now. Check the article's history in a while to see if it has settled down. Asking the current busy editor about their plans, as Tdslk suggests, is also a good idea. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:53, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
@Jonesey95, Corinne, and Tdslk: Firstly thanks for taking interest in this. Actually the articles is completely outdated, interprets lot of wrong information from unreliable sources. I have been working on the article for the past two weeks and it'll take me another couple of weeks to complete. Actually I want a thorough copy edit for the article, but only after I'm done. --Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 01:51, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Indian Air Force[edit]

Jonesey95 Should Indian Air Force also be put on hold? See discussion on requests page. Also see Jasphetamine's question.  – Corinne (talk) 14:44, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

I've declined and archived it. There are too many unanswered questions (the requesting editor used another editor's signature, and a third editor has content issues), and we're busy enough as it is :-). All the best, Miniapolis 16:57, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm automatically removed from work status on this page right? I can't find it to remove the template. Jasphetamine (talk) 18:49, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes, Jasphetamine. Once a request has been declined, it is archived (with an indication it has been declined), so I don't think you have to worry about adding or removing any work templates that had been placed at the request. Is this right, Miniapolis?  – Corinne (talk) 20:01, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Yes, Corinne. Miniapolis 00:59, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
Well I pulled the in use template from the article so at least that is setJasphetamine (talk) 20:03, 3 July 2017 (UTC)