Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WP1 0 Icon.svg
Wikipedia 1.0 — (talk)
FAQTo do
Release version tools
Guide(talk)(stats)
Article selection process
(talk)
Version 0.8 bot selection
Version 0.8 feedback
IRC channel (IRC)

Release criteria
Review team (FAQ)
Version 0.8 release
(manual selection) (t)
"Selection" project (Talk)

schools selection
Offline WP for Indian Schools


CORE TOPICS
CORE SUPPLEMENT

Core topics - 1,000
(Talk) (COTF) (bot)

TORRENT (Talk)
"Selection" project for kids ((t))
WORK VIA WIKI
PROJECTS
(talk)
Pushing to 1.0 (talk)

Static content subcom.

If you are new to this page, please see the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/FAQs.

Core topics discussionsWiki sort discussionsFAs first discussionsWork via WikiProjects discussionsPushing to 1.0 discussions

Archives[edit]

          A Wikipedia ad has been created for this project page. Click [show] to view it.

[edit]

Hi,

If this project is active, the people running it should consider changing the icon. It shows a CD, which is becoming outdated as a media format, and the old Wikipedia logo, which was retired almost seven years ago.

My own graphic design skills are pretty much zero, so unfortunately I cannot offer my own help. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 08:33, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Amire80 This project concept is from that era and so far as I know, has not updated its scope. This is a historic project that has a legacy but halted 7+ years ago. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:30, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
You're right that our icon was designed for when we did releases on CD or DVD. There are a group of us that are becoming active again, and we are working to produce another collection. The main difference is that many of the people involved come from outside the English WP community, e.g., Internet-in-a box, and WP is just one part of the overall collection needed. For example, we have this hackathon planned after Wikimania this year with about 12-15 developers; I'll update the page when I get some time. Walkerma (talk) 12:54, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Is this project still active?[edit]

If this project is still active, the status section of the page should be updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PiGuy3 (talkcontribs) 03:53, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

@PiGuy3:It's much less active than before, but we do still have a few things going on, so I've updated the Status section accordingly. If you'd like to help us with any of these activities (particularly getting the bot running again!) please let us know. Walkerma (talk) 04:48, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Oregon assessment matrix[edit]

Does anyone here know how the Oregon articles by quality and importance matrix works? I couldn’t find anyone from Wiki-Oregon team who knows how it works. All of the articles shown as needing assessments were rated at least a month ago; and since then, nothing has been added or dropped from the matrix. Bottomline … it looks like the matrix is dead in the water. Sorry, if this isn’t the right place to inquire.--Orygun (talk) 01:14, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Orygun The BOT has been down since early February, take a look at the various posts at Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index. For the time being you can run it manually whenever you want at https://tools.wmflabs.org/enwp10/cgi-bin/update.fcgi. Keith D (talk) 12:45, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
We're trying to find someone new who can take over the maintenance of the bot. In the meantime, the former people have been contacted via email, and we'll just have to run the bot manually. Walkerma (talk) 04:26, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Need some assessment help[edit]

Walkerma (or anyone else – Lane, are you interested?), can you make some time to run through the short list of articles at User:EpochFail/ORES audit for |class= assessments? EpochFail's trying to get an automated system for class assessment together, and I know it would be hugely helpful to your sideloading project, since so many class assessments are out of date. This could really be a case of spending one hour now and saving yourself hundreds of hours later.

Technical details: Just type your assessment for the article on EpochFail's page, so he knows what your rating was. The link takes you to a specific revision of the article, and it's important to assess that revision instead of the current one (else the software will be confused). (If you put the rating on the article talk page, then there's always a small chance that someone will revert you or that the article will change significantly, so a separate list is helpful in this instance.) It doesn't all have to be done by the same person. One assessment per article is enough; even if someone only assessed 10 or 20, or did the ones that they thought were easy, then that alone would be hugely helpful. Feel free to {{ping}} me if you have any questions. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:53, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Yes- I'll aim to do some of these this weekend. That's a very interesting idea! I agree that many assessments are out of date. 03:09, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks to several people helping out, we've got most of them done. I think there's just 12 left to go now.
A couple of the links were bad, probably due to pages being merged in subsequent years. If you remember seeing anything odd (like a redirect page instead of an article), then please make a note of that on the page, so EpochFail can double-check them. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Discussion of significant changes to featured Japan article[edit]

Please come participate in the discussion here. Thank you. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 20:35, 4 May 2017 (UTC)