Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Unreferenced articles
Main page | Discussion | How to guide | Resources | Mistagged articles | Backlog drives |
---|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Backlog progress
edit86,998! Well done, everyone :) Boleyn (talk) 09:22, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Looking good! Anything you'd like to see highlighted on the August update on the 4th? Kazamzam (talk) 15:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, Kazamzam, I have just seen this. Nothing in particular, just lovely to see it heading downwards. Boleyn (talk) 08:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
It's very strange for a WikiProject template to not start with "WikiProject" (only 2 templates in Category:WikiProject banners with non-standard names don't start with "WikiProject" vs. the 1076 in Category:WikiProject banners with quality assessment & Category:WikiProject banners without quality assessment that do) , so Template:Wikipedia Unreferenced articles improved should be renamed to Template:WikiProject Unreferenced articles improved, unless there's a good reason to keep it as-is.
I put in a RM to do so 2 weeks ago, but admittedly forgot about it until I noticed its recent close (as no consensus), and realized I should have posted here after initiating it, so am posting here now for visibility & historical purposes, and in case anyone else feels the need to re-RM. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 06:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Tom.Reding - excellent catch, thank you so much for alerting us to this. Definitely agree that it would benefit all to have the template reworked. Paging some of the usual suspects (@Boleyn, @CactiStaccingCrane, @ARandomName123, @DreamRimmer, @Cielquiparle) to get more feedback. Kazamzam (talk) 14:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Looks good to me, though Gonnym’s suggestion could work as well (ex. {{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors}}) ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 01:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, {{WikiProject Unreferenced articles}} works for me too, and it's probably the most intuitive option, but I'm agnostic about whether or not "improved" is kept, since it's been used since 2010, so I'll defer to project participants on that. Redirects for either case can be made if desired. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 17:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ARandomName123 @Tom.Reding I think alerting people to the project's existence by changing the template name but also the discussion would be very useful, especially as we gear up for the drive. We could also revise the edit summary that we use for main space for a talk page summary as well. Kazamzam (talk) 11:40, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, {{WikiProject Unreferenced articles}} works for me too, and it's probably the most intuitive option, but I'm agnostic about whether or not "improved" is kept, since it's been used since 2010, so I'll defer to project participants on that. Redirects for either case can be made if desired. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 17:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Looks good to me, though Gonnym’s suggestion could work as well (ex. {{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors}}) ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 01:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
November 2024 Backlog Drive
editThe URA Backlog Drive 2 (Backlog vs. Jason) is now in planning stages. Comrade in arms @CactiStaccingCrane brilliantly made a backlog drives tab for the project so I think we can shift most of the discussion over there; it might be good to add a message on the project landing page as well for anyone who would like to be involved. There are several points for discussion that I think all previous planners are aware of and hopefully, since we have a lot of time, we can really iron them out and have an excellent drive (15k reduction is my personal goal) and then be on a good course for a semiannual schedule. Cheers, Kazamzam (talk) 14:37, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- For this drive, could we include a secondary goal of clearing all unreferenced BLPs? There’s only about 800 left, and with a push, we can probably bring it to zero. Regarding the drive pages, I’ll start creating them using February’s as guidance in a few hours, unless someone wants to get to them first? Looking forward to working with you all again! ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 10:16, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Getting through unreferenced BLPs seems like a great idea. I reckon once its down to zero it'll be possible to keep it there which would be good for the whole project. -- D'n'B-t -- 11:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Started Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced articles/Backlog drives/November 2024, feel free to make changes. Keeping in line with FEB24, I believe NOV24 is the correct shortening for the November drive, and have created WP:NOV24. Cheers, ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 15:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ARandomName123 - brilliant! Kazamzam (talk) 00:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Would any of the redirect templates listed at Template:Unreferenced count? MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:46, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333: Well assuming they all generate {{unreferenced}}, I see no reason not to count them. I wouldn’t count anything under the related tags header (ex. {{one source}}or {{more citations needed}}), however. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 04:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Makes sense as those tags indicate at least has at least one citation. Thanks! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:47, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333: Well assuming they all generate {{unreferenced}}, I see no reason not to count them. I wouldn’t count anything under the related tags header (ex. {{one source}}or {{more citations needed}}), however. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 04:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Talk page
editDo we want to create a November 2024 drive-specific talk page? The February 2024 one redirects to the main project but it would be useful to have a dedicated space for planning purposes. For example, I think the phrasing of 'To encourage additional reviews, the drive will be extended for one week (December 1-8) as an additional review period.' is wonky but I don't want to clog up the talk page here. However the drive talk page should be the place for drive participants to discuss issues they might be having, not just to how to see how the soyrizo is made. Maybe we start the discussion there and then archive everything on October 31st to start fresh (fresh-ish)? Kazamzam (talk) 11:46, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, sounds good to me! ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 13:04, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- On a related note, I noticed this talk page doesn't seem to have auto-archiving set up. Should we add it? ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 13:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
August 2024
editShorter update than usual but happy 17th anniversary to the launch of the Phoenix spacecraft! I hope everyone is doing swimmingly.
- Headline: We cleared 5148 articles since June! For yourself and your fellow editors, please clap.
- Highlights: September 2008 is in the bin! There was also tremendous work done by editors @MIDI on geography stubs, reducing September 2013 from 1,489 to 627 (57%!), and to @Gnisacc for whittling December 2023 down to 73 articles, a 71% decrease.
- Low-hanging fruit: October 2008 is only a measly 8 articles left, dangling precariously like a sinner in the hands of an angry God. Give it a nudge.
- High-hanging fruit: Everyone's favourite BFC (Big Friendly Category), December 2009, is a shapely 11,593 articles as of this writing - so much freshness and only 2 calories. The other high-hanging fruit are, still, the Frustrating Five (name open for revision): January 2013 (1,118), April 2019 (1,037), May 2019 (2,103), June 2019 (4,433), and September 2020 (1,393). Once again, September 2020 had the lowest percentage of change between updates. Godspeed to anyone working on these.
- Announcements: The second URA drive is in the planning stages! We will begin 1 November 2024 and end 30 November 2024, with a proposed extra week for review where participants can earn extra points. The planning is active and ongoing so please feel free to get involved.
- New challenge: no ties this update! Carry on.
Next update will be 4 October 2024 and then, after a pause for the drive, 4 January 2025. My personal goal is to have 2008 entirely finished by the new year and it seems more doable than ever. Happy editing! Kazamzam (talk) 14:10, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
84,960! Still steady progress. Well done, everyone. Boleyn (talk) 08:30, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks @Boleyn for the round up! And thanks to @Cielquiparle (and whoever else is responsible) for again working to clear up the dregs of another month. October 2008 is dead! Turtlecrown (talk) 13:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Anytime! 💁🏻♀️ Kazamzam (talk) 14:51, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thenks for the update, @Kazamzam! (And for dealing the final blows to October 2008.) Curious whether we collectively succeeded in decreasing every category by at least 10, as you suggested back in June? Cielquiparle (talk) 04:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Cielquiparle - thanks so much for the follow-up! There were eleven categories that didn't make the cut. Both February and June 2009 only decreased by 7 articles, which is...not great but that means there's just more room for improvement. Kazamzam (talk) 22:56, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thenks for the update, @Kazamzam! (And for dealing the final blows to October 2008.) Curious whether we collectively succeeded in decreasing every category by at least 10, as you suggested back in June? Cielquiparle (talk) 04:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Anytime! 💁🏻♀️ Kazamzam (talk) 14:51, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- 83,996! Still heading in the right direction. Boleyn (talk) 19:46, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
November 2024 Backlog Drive Planning
editMaybe we could just discuss here instead of waiting for someone to start a separate Talk page? Seems prudent to start planning now since it's mid-September. @Kazamzam, @ARandomName123, @Boleyn, @CactiStaccingCrane, and whoever else is interested in helping. Cielquiparle (talk) 07:42, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Cielquiparle - you’re absolutely right. I think the biggest issues from February were how to judge an adequate reference (and how to make sure we have enough reviewers), if one reference is sufficient (I don’t love it for a big article but I think it has to be sufficient given the premise of the project and the campaign), how to make sure edits are counted (we used the edits summary function but personally I like the idea of people submitting through a checker in the same way that Asian Month does) and if there’s a way to get multiple points for one article (I’m on the fence). If anyone else has big ticket items to address, please bring them up! Kazamzam (talk) 10:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Kazamzam: I'm assuming the checker you're referring to is https://fountain.toolforge.org/? I haven't used it before, but if by checker you mean there's a function for us to review edits in the tool, that'd be really nice. I also noticed there's https://hashtags.wmcloud.org/, which imo is better than the tool we used last time, which searches for an edit summary (with a hashtag) over all users (ex), instead of one-by-one as we did previously. I'd personally prefer edit summaries for the convenience though.
- The extra review week last time went pretty well imo, though I'm not sure if we actually applied the point deductions for failed reviews.
- In total, we had 14.3k articles reffed, with just under 2k reviews (14% or so). This could probably be a bit higher, as it was kind of hectic last time.
- There's not really much else I can think of to address, other than what you already mentioned. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 05:59, 12 September 2024 (UTC)