Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Archives/2024

Merry Christmas! And a heartfelt thanks

I just wanted to pop by and say thank yall for doing a much-needed task on Wikipedia. For me in particular, I put in a rushed request for Yule cat- and yall came through beautifully. So, thank you all, have merry Christmas, and a happy New Years. Sincerely, SilverTiger12 (talk) 21:54, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

SilverTiger12, thanks for the kind message. Happy New Year! Wracking ^talk! 21:48, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Stadio Olimpico

Hello, I'm an Italian wikipedian, and wrote the said article on en.wiki. I would like to have a native speaker to correct my English, how can I request help? -- Blackcat 23:55, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Blackcat. You can request a copyedit here, and someone will get to it as soon as possible. All the best, Miniapolis 00:09, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, @Miniapolis:, you're very kind. -- Blackcat 00:19, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Astroworld Festival crowd crush copyedit

I took on a copyedit request for this article, and I'm slightly regretting it. I'd love to continue working on it, but I'd like to request some help with it.

Largely, the article is just far too long, at over 10,000 words - and its length is especially present at the Timeline heading, which needs:

• Source review
• Massive cutdown of superflous text
• Simplification of detailed account of events - I'm having a hard time myself prioritsing what is/isn't important so would love to sound off about it with someone else
• General spellcheck etc

I'm going to remove the article from my tasklist in the January challenge, but would love it if someone would help me out with this :) EphemeralPerpetuals (they/them) (talk) 19:56, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

EphemeralPerpetuals, you're certainly not the first (or last) of us copy editors to bite off more than you can chew!

I recommend working on the backlog (as it looks like you're doing). I find that articles that have been tagged more recently are usually a bit easier to tackle.

If an article seems too complicated or long, skip it. (If the copy edit tag seems insufficient/inaccurate as the article has bigger problems, you can also remove the copy edit tag and replace it with more relevant ones – see WP:OVERTAG). Also, as a note, while copy editors may have to check sources (e.g., to discern meaning), full source reviews are usually out of our purview. If an article seems to have sourcing issues, I usually add a relevant maintenance templates (I keep a list of several navboxes here: User:Wracking/helpful).

Thanks for signing up for the drive and for your efforts thus far! Wracking ^talk! 21:47, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@EphemeralPerpetuals: Expect a 10,000 word article to take some time. If I can get through 1,000 words a day, I'm doing well.

This article seems fairly readable. There are parts that could be clearer, such as "Pictures and videos shared on social media showed split metal detectors, rushing checkpoints, fans on top of cars...", where "split" should probably be "broken" and "fans" should precede "rushing checkpoints". It doesn't help that an apparent typo such as "turnt-up" (should read "turned-up"?) accurately reflects the wording in the source. For the moment, strive for making the text clear and don't worry too much about the amount of detail or the plethora of citations (I myself leave detail in, unless blatantly redundant or irrelevant). Dhtwiki (talk) 09:28, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@Dhtwiki, see wikt:turnt Wracking ^talk! 16:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice !! :) EphemeralPerpetuals (they/them) (talk) 17:11, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@EphemeralPerpetuals I've noticed you were the one to take on my copyedit request, many thanks! I'd be glad to help a bit, as I understand your overwhelmed feelings (exactly how I felt before asking for assistance, lol). In terms of advice, I think the extreme details that feel far too intricate should be removed. For example, I don't think there's much reasoning for describing events only occurring minutes apart as separate under the 'Crush' subtitle, the fifth paragraph. Another thing, I think the extremely long paragraphs should be chopped up a bit to make them easier to read and not feel exhaustive. Again, much luck to you, and again, I'd be happy to help out a bit if needed. SonOfYoutubers (talk) 01:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Hannah Lewi

Hello to all. I'm new to Wikipedia editing, and starting with assisting via copyediting. Is anyone willing to take a look at the Hannah Lewi page and let me know if there's anything I missed or should be watching out for when it comes to copy editing? Thanks for any assistance and excited to get more practice in. WW0CJ (talk) 03:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

One thing I just realized - would you guys keep the here with the mention of other architects? Not sure how applicable it is here...

> Alongside Paul Walker, Julie Willis and Philip Goad, Lewi is a co-director of the Australian Centre for Architectural History, Urban and Cultural Heritage (ACAHUCH). She is renowned for her generosity towards other scholars and mentoring of new researchers. WW0CJ (talk) 04:59, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @WW0CJ:, welcome to the Guild. I can't comment on that particular article but you can find some links to copy-editing tips on our "How-to" page. I've also added a "welcome" to your talk page, it has links to pages about Wikipedia policies, guidelines and editing culture. I hope you find it useful. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 09:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

With regard to the quoted sentences, the first one is matter-or-fact and has a citation supporting it, but the second verges on MOS:PEACOCK and is unsupported, as well as having a "citation needed" template attached. Otherwise, the article seems in good shape. However, more could be done. The capitalization of "Chair" and "Vice-Chair" is questionable, per MOS:JOBTITLES. Among "Selected publications", journal article titles should be set off with double, not single, quotation marks. There are several citations that supply only bare URLs. Fixing those isn't usually considered copy editing per se, but it is generally helpful to have more information given, to help prevent WP:LINKROT. More terms could be linked to other Wikipedia articles, such as placemaking and architecture of Western Australia. Dhtwiki (talk) 09:31, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Support

Hi,

I really want to let you all know that I am really interested in copy editing on Wii. I really want to do this but I am really silly and I just look at an article and don't know where to begin.

I have very bad self confidence issues and I think it's a double edged sword, because I want to use this as a way to get it better, but it's so bad that it's stopping me feeling good enough to contribute.

I would love a step by step guide to check for things on each page so I know what I'm looking for, where to start. A flowchart would be amazing.

I have read the guides that are linked on the copyedit page and the beginners guides and everything but I feel silly as I still feel overwhelmed MrBauer24 (talk) 23:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

@MrBauer24: One of the things that I do when starting a new article is look at spacing issues. Look for separating hatnotes, image specifications, and punctuation from following text. A lot of what we do here involves just making sure that the spacing is appropriate. While you're doing this, you are apt to spot gross errors in spelling or diction, without having to get too immersed in the article's subject matter. Another thing is to look over the references section and flesh out with templates citations that contain only URLs or are otherwise insufficiently informative, or correct citations that have been flagged for errors. Reading through the cited material while you're doing this, especially when it's online, will give you a handle on what the article is supposed to be saying, as well as making sure that the material exists for readers to consult. Apart from all that, pick shorter articles for copy editing, and those on subject matter you're familiar with. As far as Wikipedia's guidelines, there is indeed a lot to understand, and you shouldn't be surprised that you feel overwhelmed. Dhtwiki (talk) 01:51, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @MrBauer24:, welcome to the GOCE. I understand copy-editing can be overwhelming. I agree with Dhtwiki about taking short articles to begin with. below are a few tips to make copy-editing a little less stressful:

• Edit one section or sub-section at a time, this makes even huge articles less daunting.
• Work paragraph by paragraph, just fix the language as you go.
• Break up long paragraphs into shorter ones of seven or fewer lines. Break them after a citation if you can.
• Read each sentence (speaking it aloud might help) and think about what it is telling you. If you can, simplify the language by removing or replacing unnecessary words and phrases like "due to the fact that", "moreover", etc.
• Our step-by-step copy-editing guide should be enough to give you some ideas.

Good luck and cheers, Baffle☿gab 20:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

MrBauer24: This may seem a bit mean, but given the many punctuation errors in your message above, it may be best for you to work on some other aspect of Wikipedia aside from copy-editing. That said, some of the articles tagged for copy-editing are indeed short and of very low quality, and I expect that you could improve them. One tip I use a lot is to read a sentence aloud to see if it makes sense when I speak it; if not, I try to fix it accordingly. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Need crosscheck on request article

Just finished a quick CE on Matooskie. Could anyone look over my edits and see if I should consider the CE finished? Zorblin (talk) 03:55, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Looks pretty good to me, and the article survived the GAR. You should add {{GOCE}} to the talk page (under the WikiProject banners), so other editors will know it's been copyedited. Thanks and all the best, Miniapolis 14:14, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

It's also courteous to add {{GOCEtb}} to the requester's talk page, in case they're not watching WP:GOCE/REQ. Miniapolis 14:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, Thanks! Zorblin (talk) 01:36, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, thank you for the check-in, coming back from a irl break. Zorblin (talk) 01:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Request for crosscheck on Joyce Mojonnier

I signed up to CE an article from the backlog, Joyce Mojonnier, and would appreciate feedback. After reviewing some of the comments above, I think I may have done more than is required. I'm a novice, so I did do a bit more than just CE, like verifying links/citations. I spent the time trying to learn and practice using some of the wiki-concepts. So here are some specific questions I have (about the process and the edits I made):

• I added a thread to the Talk page, which I think I know isn't required; but I wanted to try out that process. There, I outlined my changes, and added a {done} tag to keep track. Question: Any feedback on those issues? (Besides the fact they are probably beyond what is meant by a basic CE.)

In fact, if it's easier to give feedback by leaving it on the article's talk page, I can check there.

• As instructed, I added the {GOCEinuse} tag before starting work; and I removed the tag for {Copy edit|for=tone} that had already been left. So some of my edits were for 'tone', which seemed to be a bit of peacocking (is that the word?) or advertising (like for the Foundation and Museum). If this is part of CE, do I just leave an appropriate comment (and take out or rephrase for NPOV)?
• I removed some material that seemed off-topic (better suited for another article); so I added a thread (actually two) on the Talk page to keep track. Q: That is required, right?
• Some of the material removed was simply not relevant (as outlined on my talkpage thread). In that case, it's just ok to leave a comment with the CE? (As I did, I think.)
• One of the comments above mentions: as a note, while copy editors may have to check sources (e.g., to discern meaning), full source reviews are usually out of our purview. But I went ahead, anyway, and checked the citations. Some had old xlinks, so I found/replaced with new. I also added some citations to material that seemed unsupported. This may be outside CE, but isn't that suggested as an alt to just tagging with {citation needed}?
• Even after editing, I think some of the material could still use better citations: so I tagged two specific spots (and added a thread to the talk page). I don't think this is a highly trafficked or controversial article; so is adding a few inline tags better than the big warning citation tag?
• Last question (I promise!): CE does include looking at the wikitext (like in hatnotes), yes? (I think that may be answered above.)

Anyway, advice and feedback would be appreciated; and let me know what to do next on this task. I'll try to look for another simple, short article in the backlog (or recent requests for GOCE attn) for my next one; but some of them seem like they need more project level revision, than just CE or TLC. (I think the advice given above was: If it's too complicated, skip it.) Thanks for your time, in advance. (And apologies for my verbosity.) — Yogabear2020 (talk) 21:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

You've done a thorough job and turned a wall of text into something that's more manageable to read. Thank you for your help.

The detailed threads such as you added to the talk page are more likely to be seen on articles where copy edits have been requested and there are likely to be interested editors to respond. They are less likely for articles that have been tagged for copy editing, where active subject-matter editors are less likely to be paying attention. Explaining yourself to others (and to yourself, which is always helpful) can be done with edit summaries alone, where you have a 500 (or is it 1,000?) character limit, and where people can more directly examine the changes via diffs. The reasons you gave for removing extraneous material seem sound to me.

Full source reviews are not required for copy editing, but any copy editing is made better by consulting sources and in doing so finding citations that could stand improvement, as well as making other improvements, such as more specific hatnotes, wiki-links, and anything else that make the article more intelligible.

As far as further improvements: I would provide some ending punctuation to the items in your bulleted list, and improve the complicated next-to-last sentence, possibly to This museum collects and displays—both online and at the physical space—video-recorded oral histories, as well as other historical memorabilia, collected from former female members of the California legislature.

Dhtwiki (talk) 05:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Your explanations of "source review" and using "detailed threads" was helpful. Should I just remove that whole detailed thread I first added to the talk page? But leave the others (just in case) explaining why material was removed?

For the article, I changed the next-to-last sentence as you suggested. But before adding punctuation to the list, I wonder about MOS:LISTFORMAT. Here it suggests using sentence case for list items that are "complete sentences", but not to use sentence case for "fragments" (such as the items on the JM article-list). The MOS then adds:

A list item should not end with a full stop unless it consists of a complete sentence or is the end of a list that forms one.

Can you clarify for me? Then I'll fix the list, and take the next steps to finish the CE review. Thanks again! — Yogabear2020 (Talk) 13:05, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Leave the talk page threads. They're fine. That article's talk page doesn't have but one other thread, and no archives.

Most lists consist of simple names, such as of people or places. Your list is more complicated, and I thought it looked barren without more punctuation, such as ending most items with semi-colons and the last with a period, as though it is a complete sentence, as follows.

These include:

• the Hazardous Medical Waste Management Act, which served as a national model for medical waste clean-up;
• legislation to provide closed circuit television testimony for use with child witnesses involved in cases involving sexual offenses, and similar legislation for use with violent offenders to eliminate the need to transport them;
• legislation to require children's waiting rooms at courthouses, in the interest of protecting young children from unfriendly or threatening circumstances;
• and legislation requiring reflector license plates.

Dhtwiki (talk) 23:07, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok, that all makes sense! I followed your model, and made the changes (incl. "and" in last bullet). Per the Backlog Drive instructions, I removed {{GOCEinuse}} from article, and added {{GOCE}} to talk page. Is that right? Hope so. I'll later add completed on drive page.

Thanks very much for your help and encouragement. (And your patience.) — Yogabear2020 (Talk) 00:54, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

It's usual to fill the "user" and "date" fields when placing the GOCE template on the article talk page, which I've done for you, as well as including your hidden comment, as that might be mystifying, especially if it becomes separated from the template. Also, it's usual to have the GOCE template within the WikiProject banner shell template, if one is present, which is where I've moved yours. Dhtwiki (talk) 05:44, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, good to know. I had looked at how the editor on the previous thread had placed the tag on the Matooskie talk page; but I guess I should have looked at the GOCE page for instructions. Still learning! Thanks, again. — Yogabear2020 (Talk) 12:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

References