Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2012 · 2013 · 2014 · 2015 · 2016 · 2017 · 2018 · 2019 · 2020 · 2021 · 2022 · 2023 ·

2012

Tips section

Suggest a "tips" section, where we point out common issues and how to fix them, such as how to format ISBNs and why 13 is preferred over 10.PumpkinSky talk 11:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

CE request

Bryllupsdag på Troldhaugen needs an English speaker, especially for the translation of the first title, in German "Die Gratulanten kommen", the guest who want to congratulate. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:43, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Auditing old FAs - something we could help with?

Some of you may have seen comments at FAC/TFAR etc talk pages about Dweller's survey of the older FAs to see which are suitable for the main page without any or much difficulty and which need FAR sooner rather than later. He asked whether there was interest in setting up a new Wikiproject to tackle the work, but I wonder if it would fit neatly within the scope of WP:QAI - and it might help attract more people here too to help with QAI's other work. Thoughts? BencherliteTalk 11:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

It sounds like a reasonable view. I am going to be out of the country for a while starting tonight so I probably won't be able to do much. But checking old FAs sounds worthwhile and it has nothing to do with FA leadership, which will hopefully stifle the comments I saw that this is some sort of a cabal meeting place. That being said, Bencherlite, it would be helpful in drumming up enthusiasm, if you would stop removing Br'er Rabbit's name from the project page. I have changed "members" to "contributors" and he certainly did that, so this should resolve that matter.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
I didn't realise that keeping the name of someone who could no longer participate in a list of participants would be so controversial. Consider it resolved. To deal with your other point, I hadn't seen comments about this being a cabal meeting place, although I haven't seen many comments at all about WP:QAI elsewhere, to tell the truth... WP's best-kept secret squad of superheroes?! BencherliteTalk 12:34, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps it was on IRC ... that being said, including Br'er's name is a small conceit indeed compared to saying that an inactive editor who left under the threat of ArbCom sanctions is the absolute ruler of a certain part of the project.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:03, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Erm. Is there a view on the main point raised here? --Dweller (talk) 12:18, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

The idea is good, but I don't see a person to deal with it right now, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:18, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
I will have very limited internet access for a month starting early next week, so I can't commit time. But it is a good idea.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

2013

Where should we conduct article reviews?

Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Article reviews and talk pages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps I don't understand the problem yet. My example: this is now linked from the talk, and will be under Article milestones when done, - all this (+ its even longer talk) would be long on the article talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:15, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Technical expertise

Wonder if there is some way we can generate a "go to" list of people with specific expertise in things like {{sfn}} markup, navbox design, improving existing and noncontroversial things that are used behind the scenes by wikipedia or google to help with searches, how to format for FAC runs, people willing to do specific reviews for the petty things like endashes and emdashes, etc. Call it a talent bank or something. Thoughts? Montanabw(talk) 21:54, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Good idea! Anybody who wants to know about microformats should ask RexxS, for example, see the explanation at Talk:Mont Juic (suite)#Removed Infobox that even I might understand, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:26, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Dyanega is an insect expert. M.E. Hahn is a mushroom expert. PumpkinSky talk 22:43, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Help with citations in my developing article98.245.92.62 (talk) 15:58, 15 May 2013 (UTC)Larry Kaptein

Hello.

I've been directed here by Wikipedia editor, Mark Arsten, who was unable to answer the citation formatting problem I'm encountering with my developing article. Yesterday, I added in all the required secondary sources throughout the body of the article text, when I went to 'save' the work all of the citations displayed 'empty citation.' I've reviewed the footnote, citation information on Wikipedia, (and a lot of other material that Mark has directed me to) but, I remain stumped. Obviously, I'm doing something incorrectly and am hoping that someone on this site will take pity on me (and my woeful lack of technical expertise!) and help me. Right now, I'm pretty frustrated and definitely in need of a way out of the weeds.

Here are three examples of how I formatted various citations in my article. Have a done something wrong here?  !

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help)

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help)

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help)

Many, Many Thanks,

Larry Kaptein

Wow. Sorry I didn't notice this before. I know how to fix this. Which article are you talking about? Do you still need help? PumpkinSky talk 22:46, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

2014

Wikiproject proposal

I would like to invite this group to the discussion Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Neutral Editors.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 02:41, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to User Study

Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 18:12, 15 March 2014 (UTC).

Leaflet For Wikiproject Quality Article Improvement At Wikimania 2014

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

"Approved cabal for improvement"

Could this unusual placing and wording be discussed? I find it odd: it obscures other text, and it is not at all clear what it refers to. In a word, it is not transparent to the uninitiated user. If this page is intended to communicate to people outside the "cabal" (is it), surely there would be some clearer way of indicating (a) who the "cabal" is (nowhere else mentioned on the page) and (b) what the approval means. Simon Grant (talk) 17:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, but I feel a bit like explaining a joke. Background: the image and cabal wisdom. First message: we are odd. You received that ;) - Second: we don't take ourselves too serious. Did you get that? Third: we are able to do unusual things and communicate that. You got it. The terms "cabal" and "QAI shenigans" were used for us by respected users, that's approval enough. - Unfortunately fourth: I copied (look here for the model) but am not able to position it better, help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
OK I give in :) Just that, perhaps, in jokes shouldn't be at the expense of outsiders. In this case, their ability to read the material... We had a small conference session on the topic of Wikipedia this week, and it is very clear that there are so many outsiders out there, of which I am obviously one. Humour doesn't have to oppose transparency, but if it does, I'd favour transparency every time, to be kind. I appreciate it when jokes are self-documenting... Bach's music stands by itself, even if you don't understand the immensely subtle structure. It wouldn't work to explain away a discordant note as a joke, but we don't need to. Simon Grant (talk) 05:04, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Did you find the model? I was able to change some parameters, but I don't know how to make it appear in the empty space next to it's creator in all browsers. If you can help with that you are welcome. It's not a joke, rather an epitaph. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:29, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
No sorry I didn't find the model, as that page is enormous. Any tips how to find it in the page? Simon Grant (talk) 03:32, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Look for "thanks for fixing my screwups", - that is the refrain of the page of enormous contributions to Wikipedia, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:32, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
If there was no in-house humor around here, we'd all give up. This is a volunteer activity, Asimong, and no one is paying us to put up with all the shit which which we are given, so we have to do what we can to keep inspired. Montanabw(talk) 18:57, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Continuation of discussion

Continuation of discussion from my user talk page as started by Gerda Arendt (talk · contribs) and Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs).

What were you two going to suggest?

— Cirt (talk) 13:37, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I asked if I was meant. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:52, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Related project - WP:TAFI

Recently a member of our weekly improvement drive stumbled upon this project page. I just wanted to say hello and see if there was any thing that our two groups could collaborate together on, or if we could provide support to one another in some manner. --NickPenguin(contribs) 16:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello back! Historically, we came from the TFA area, because we had to improvise when an important person there left. Accessibility became another topic. As said on the project page, we are rather unorganized, and sadly missing important people. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Fact checking

Right now I'm reading up on esophageal cancer and intend reviewing Esophageal cancer soon and proposing/making changes, to prepare it for review by an expert nominated by CRUK. I'm going to copy and collate the supporting text from every source, and am going to ask someone independent to check every assertion against the supporting RS text before we submit it for expert review.

Presently, at Wikiproject Medicine, we're not using "A Class". I'm thinking of adopting that term for articles whose assertions have all been independently checked against the sources. Thoughts? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 13:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I am short on time and not a medical expert, but let's see, - I am not alone, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:59, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I'd just ignore A-class and use WP:GA and WP:Peer review. — Cirt (talk) 14:15, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Using existing processes makes sense. But "GA" doesn't mean someone has independently checked that all the content reflects what the cited sources say. I'm proposing articles whose veracity has been independently checked against the sources be marked as such.
I'm very focussed on making Wikipedia a WP:RS, at least as far as our medical content is concerned. Although this independent veracity-check won't make an article a WP:RS on its own, it will take it closer - and I think medical articles that have been through it ought to have some kind of recognition, and I thought calling them "A" class was as good a designation as any.
What do you think of the idea of making a Wikipedia article a reliable source? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 14:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
It's an idea! My second article ever - I had planned only one but that came with the wish to link to another which didn't exist yet ... - was a translation from German. I thought that was all sourcing needed ;) - I think even if you had an sc-article (sources checked), that could change with any new edit. As long as we have the idea of free editing, we can't guarantee reliability. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I think WP:FA is a better standard than A-class. — Cirt (talk) 16:36, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

FA is better than A-class, and GA "should" indicate A-class quality, though we know some reviewers don't necessarily engage in rigorous fact- checking. I am wondering if you folks would want to do something akin to what the MilHist WP does, with an independent project A-class review, an example of this was done on one of "my" older GAs after it passed its GAN, Horses in Warfare, see the project boxes at Talk:Horses_in_warfare. Perhaps a similar sort of "this project 'blesses' this article as accurate" standard could be created - one criterion would be meticulous fact-checking and review of sources. Montanabw(talk) 16:51, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

That is an excellent idea, and the WP:MILHIST process is a good model. — Cirt (talk) 17:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Someone's mentioned MilHist in this context before. I'd better go check it out. Thanks for the feedback.
Gerda, regarding the ephemeral nature of fack-checking, what we're planning on doing is putting a badge at the top of articles that have been through topic-expert review (like the ones being reviewed by CRUK) linking the reader to the version that has passed expert review. The idea is that version (not the current version) - if the review process is truly expert and independent - will be a WP:RS. I.e., it should be reliable enough to cite in other Wikipedia articles. (I wouldn't expect anyone to do that, when they could as easily cite the article's sources - I'm just pointing out the degree of reliability we're aiming for with the expert-review process.) --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 00:26, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
I understand that quoting a certain "certified" checked version as reliable would be an idea. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:28, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

"Gutting" an article during deletion discussion

I've created an essay on Gutting an article during deletion discussion.

You may find it interesting reading at: User:Cirt/Gutting.

Cheers,

— Cirt (talk) 18:22, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

2015

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Good to know, watching for now, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Copy-edit football team

See Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Peru national football team, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:19, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Done, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:42, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Remedy six of the infoboxes case

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox for an initiative regarding this recommended remedy. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:56, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Compromise now found without it, but thank you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:43, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

How could I sign-up?

I'm terribly sorry if it is wrong to put my application here (but that's what is said in the page, yet there is none so) but could I join this project? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neutral Isotope (talk • contribs) 13:36, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

If you are sure you want to join you simply go to the project page and enter your name, preceded by # and signed by four tildes (which you missed doing above, I sent some explanations to your talk), - no prerequisites except assuming good faith. This talk page is for requests. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:46, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyright Violation Detection - EranBot Project

A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest.--Lucas559 (talk) 22:51, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:16, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

project participant userbox?

Gerda Arendt • Haben wir ein Userboxen? JackTheVicar (talk) 16:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

No, not yet, people may be ashamed to out themselves as members of the cabal of the outcasts, - go ahead, design one. We have boxes for Precious, for example, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:30, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Herewith: JackTheVicar (talk) 22:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC) {{User QAI outcast}}

That's good, only the image is great - love the subtle irony - but not recognizable that size, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • hard to find anything that scales well to 50px.JackTheVicar (talk) 13:24, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
yes, - anything abstact? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:39, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
abstract in which way? I found a great picture of sugar cane cutters in the Caribbean. Tough work. I just thought a stone mason would be more apropos. JackTheVicar (talk) 14:01, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Fine, I took it ;) - can you make a variable, to say he or she? (Or make two?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:33, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
a female stonecutter? Let me see if I can find one. I know there's a female contractor building a house on commons. JackTheVicar (talk) 13:04, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
no, just a wording for female users, - about half of us ;) - did you see that a new member joined just because of the box? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
he joined for the userbox, but he'll stay for the beer (Cask ale, GregJackP, I'm good for a few rounds). I wrote the userbox to be gender-neutral, there's nothing that makes it exclusively male except the image. Even green is somewhat neutral. What would you suggest? JackTheVicar (talk) 13:39, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Never mind, I even took it myself as is. I don't like this "themselves", - it reminds me of the sound of my arbcom admonishment "advised to better conduct themselves" while even the least observant arb may have noticed that I am a woman. Who observed less, the one who possibly thought - 2 years ago today - that an infobox was added in an edit where it was only uncollapsed, or the colleagues who didn't question that? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:08, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Rescued article -- then to FA or GA

Have you helped take an article from Articles for deletion to Featured Article or Good Article quality ?

show your Quality improvement pride with

  • {{User AFD to FA|n}}

(where n is the number of articles you've helped rescue and take to Featured Article quality)

This user has successfully taken n articles from deletion discussion at Articles for Deletion — to Featured Article quality.

 – There's an automatically-generated list of members using this banner here.

  • {{User AFD to GA|n}}

(where n is the number of articles you've helped rescue and take to Good Article quality)

This user has successfully taken n articles from deletion discussion at Articles for Deletion — to Good Article quality.

 – There's an automatically-generated list of members using this banner here.

Check out these two new userboxes I've added, above. Haven't added them to this particular project, but added them at page for WP:Article Rescue Squadron. Perhaps editors here may find them useful, as well. — Cirt (talk) 23:22, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion to Quality Award

I've created the WP:Deletion to Quality Award.

This recognizes editors who've taken a page previously considered for deletion — to Featured Article or Good Article quality.

The award is inspired by the Wikipedia:Million Award, the Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron, and the Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement.

Please see Wikipedia:Deletion to Quality Award.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 00:25, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia term "Navel-gazing" usage in deletion debates

I've created an essay page on usage of the term "Navel-gazing" in deletion debates on Wikipedia.

Essay at: WP:Navel-gazing.

Feedback would be appreciated on the talk page, at Wikipedia talk:Navel-gazing.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 20:22, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, interesting, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:39, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

2016

GAR input sought: Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz

Hi, it has been suggested to me by editor Coretheapple in the Discussion area of a current GA reassessment that the review be brought to the attention of a wider audience. The reassessment raises the questions of sourcing; neutrality; extraordinary claims; and level of detail present in the article. The article in question is Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz and this reassessment falls within the scope of the project.

I hope editors of this project would be interested in reviewing the article to see if it still meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria and whether it should be retained or delisted as a Good article. I would appreciate any feedback you could share. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:25, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

GAR & notability discussions of potential interest

Hi, I'm sharing these two discussions with this project as they both deal with article quality:

Additional eyes on these areas would be welcome! K.e.coffman (talk) 10:26, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Notification of MfD

Without wishing to get too involved at this point, I came across an MfD of a page in this WikiProject's space and was surprised not to see a notification here: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 13:04, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

2017

Columbia River

There's an invitation on the talk of Columbia River to polish the article - an older FA - for a TFA appearance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:07, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Good news: the article will be TFA in July. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

It's today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:48, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Reformation

A peer review is open to bring Ein feste Burg ist unser Gott, BWV 80, to best possible quality for Reformation Day, Oct 31, 500 years in 2017. All other efforts are also welcome! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Rüdesheim

Rüdesheim am Rhein will be shown on the Main page with a featured article. Red links, few inline citations, - a call for improvement. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:04, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

The article was greatly improved, and four red links filled, - thanks especially to Bermicourt and GermanJoe! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:00, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

2018

Feel free to suggest work to be done. I want to focus on the psalms, beginning with Psalm 149, Sing a new song unto the Lord. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:03, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Jauchzet, dienet ...
rejoice, serve, serve with joy, reflect,
come together to dance and give thanks
listen, 2017 · see also

A related work is TFA today, - encouragement to serve with joy. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Psalms

In this section, we can collect things that we want every psalm article to have, as a recipe. I take Psalm 103 as an example. General: It's "Psalm 103", but "a psalm". Sources should be given in Wikisource, rather than external links. References!

Lead

The lead should have

  • the Septuagint/Vulgate number if different
  • the incipit in English, to make it recognizable
  • what type, per Psalms#Primary types?
  • author and time if known
  • a summary of use in liturgy and music

optional: summary of content, special features, commentary, similarity/relation to other psalms

Text and theme

It is nice to have at least some text, in Hebrew and English.

Liturgical use

Subdivided by denomination.

Musical settings

This section can get very long, then consider a list or table. If hymns are derived from the psalm they should come first, because often other music is derived from them.

External links

should contain

  • Commonscat if not empty
  • Source, always in English (and check for other languages), {{wikisource|Bible (King James)/Psalms#Psalm 103|Psalm 103}}:
Wikisource has original text related to this article:

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:23, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Text

It's a problem that the numbering of the psalms is different Hebrew/Greek, and also the numbering of the verses is different Hebrew/English. Playing with it, example Psalm 84:

No. H Hebrew English No. E Latin No L
84:1 לַמְנַצֵּחַ עַל-הַגִּתִּית; לִבְנֵי-קֹרַח מִזְמוֹר. For the Leader; upon the Gittith. A Psalm of the sons of Korah. In finem pro torcularibus filiis Core Psalmus 83:1
84:2 מַה-יְּדִידוֹת מִשְׁכְּנוֹתֶיךָ-- יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת. How amiable are thy tabernacles, O Lord of hosts! 84:1 Quam dilecta tabernacula tua Domine virtutum 83:2

Ideas? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Psalm 84

Psalm 84 was improved to GA and can serve as the best model so far. For text, it has Hebrew and its translations, and the KJV. -Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

"generally known by its first verse"

User:Gerda Arendt, are Psalms really generally known in English by their first verse? I'm seeing this on a lot of Psalm articles, but I'm having trouble understanding where this comes from. I'd flag it as unsourced, but since you've clearly done quite a bit on the Psalms, I thought I'd hold off and see what you think. Alephb (talk) 05:24, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

How would you word that the number alone says nothing about a psalm? Many will know "The Lord is my Shepherd" but will not know any number. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
We could say "Psalm 23, in the KJV "The Lord is my Shephers", is ...", but for some psalms that would be quite long, and for others the first verse would begin "A Psalm of David" which again doesn't identify a specific one, see Sing a new song unto the Lord which could be 3. Any first line alone is not enough but the combination of number and some text should do. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
"in English" is meant to imply "in German as Der Herr ist mein Hirte", - that these songs are used in many many languages, - how to say that?

(copied from Talk:Psalm 138) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm. There's a number of questions there. I suppose in the case of Psalm 23, the "Lord is my Shepherd" language is a well-known way of referring to it. Or with Psalm 22, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me..." For those, the incipit functions kind of like a title. I guess where I wonder most is with a Psalm like 145: "I will extol thee, my God, O king; and I will bless thy name for ever and ever." I'm not sure how many English-speakers would refer to it by that "name". I suppose my concern is that this would be a little bit like saying, "Hamlet is a play by William Shakespeare, generally known in English by it's first line, 'Who's there?'" (Not a perfect analogy, I know.)
I don't want to make trouble, though -- it's entirely possible I'm missing something here. I was just curious. Also, this quality improvement area we're in is completely unfamiliar to me. Are there any special rules or practices for this area that I should know about? Alephb (talk) 09:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Understand. The Shakespeare comparison doesn't work, because Hamlet is a title, and primary topic is Shakekespeare's play. Psalm 22 is no title, and without saying more, some people will think of "The Lord is my Shepherd", and others of "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" - We need to make sure, and soon in the article, which one it is. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:31, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm totally with you on Psalms 22 and 23. My question is for the more obscure Psalms. In my experience (which of course is just me and doesn't count as a source or anything) these Psalms are generally referred to in speech as "Psalm Number X", and not by their first verse. I'm wondering if maybe for a Psalm like 138 we could open with something like: <<"Psalm 138 is the 138th psalm of the Book of Psalms, beginning with, "I will praise thee with my whole heart" (King James Version).>> I'd have just made the change myself to the Psalm in question if I hadn't seen a notice recently that seemed to imply there was some sort of review process needed first on Psalm articles. Alephb (talk) 06:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Miriam Makeba

Miriam Makeba
4 March 1932 – 9 November 2008

The project is happy about Miriam Makeba for TFA on her birthday today, "a musician and activist who had a lasting impact on music and popular culture in South Africa and abroad". Nominate your quality articles here for reviews and the TFAR process, WE CAN! ---Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:39, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

2019

Happy 2019 – a Time for thanks and praise

Feel free to suggest work to be done. Begun in 2018, I want to focus on the psalms, next Psalm 96, Sing a new song unto the Lord, and on Bach cantatas.

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht
Bachsaal at Schloss Köthen

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht (Time, which day and year doth make), BWV 134a, is a secular cantata by Johann Sebastian Bach for a celebration of New Year's Day in 1719 at the court of Leopold, Prince of Anhalt-Köthen (hall in the palace pictured). The libretto by the author Christian Friedrich Hunold portrays a dialogue between two allegorical figures, Time (representing the past) and Divine Providence (the future). Bach set the words to eight movements consisting of alternating recitatives and arias, culminating in a choral finale. Most movements are duets for alto and tenor, supported by a Baroque instrumental ensemble of two oboes, strings and continuo. The character of the music is close to Baroque opera, including its French dances. In Leipzig in 1724, Bach used this secular work as the basis for a church cantata for the Third Day of Easter, omitting two movements and changing only the text. (1 January 2019)

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Psalms

In this section, we can collect things that we want every psalm article to have, as a recipe. I take Psalm 103 as an example. General: It's "Psalm 103", but "a psalm". Sources should be given in Wikisource, rather than external links. References!

Lead

The lead should have

  • the Septuagint/Vulgate number if different
  • the beginning in English, to make it recognizable
  • what type, per Psalms#Primary types?
  • author and time if known
  • a summary of use in liturgy and music

optional: summary of content, special features, commentary, similarity/relation to other psalms

Text and theme

It is nice to have at least some text, in Hebrew and English.

as of 17 September watch out!
A website which has Hebrew text and a good translation has been found under copyright. See here. For the time being, I'd recommend to quote no text, and leave translations to external links, even if that is no service to the reader who so far could compare at a glance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:48, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Liturgical use

Subdivided by denomination.

Musical settings

This section can get very long, then consider a list or table. If hymns are derived from the psalm they should come first, because often other music is derived from them.

External links

should contain

  • Commonscat if not empty
  • Source, always in English (and check for other languages), {{wikisource|Bible (King James)/Psalms#Psalm 103|Psalm 103}}:
Wikisource has original text related to this article:

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:23, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Text

It's a problem that the numbering of the psalms is different Hebrew/Greek, and also the numbering of the verses is different Hebrew/English. Playing with it, example Psalm 84:

No. H Hebrew English No. E Latin No L
84:1 לַמְנַצֵּחַ עַל-הַגִּתִּית; לִבְנֵי-קֹרַח מִזְמוֹר. For the Leader; upon the Gittith. A Psalm of the sons of Korah. In finem pro torcularibus filiis Core Psalmus 83:1
84:2 מַה-יְּדִידוֹת מִשְׁכְּנוֹתֶיךָ-- יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת. How amiable are thy tabernacles, O Lord of hosts! 84:1 Quam dilecta tabernacula tua Domine virtutum 83:2

Ideas? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Psalm 84

Psalm 84 was improved to GA and can serve as the best model so far. For text, it has Hebrew and its translations, and the KJV. -Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

"generally known by its first verse"

User:Gerda Arendt, are Psalms really generally known in English by their first verse? I'm seeing this on a lot of Psalm articles, but I'm having trouble understanding where this comes from. I'd flag it as unsourced, but since you've clearly done quite a bit on the Psalms, I thought I'd hold off and see what you think. Alephb (talk) 05:24, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

How would you word that the number alone says nothing about a psalm? Many will know "The Lord is my Shepherd" but will not know any number. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
We could say "Psalm 23, in the KJV "The Lord is my Shephers", is ...", but for some psalms that would be quite long, and for others the first verse would begin "A Psalm of David" which again doesn't identify a specific one, see Sing a new song unto the Lord which could be 3. Any first line alone is not enough but the combination of number and some text should do. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
"in English" is meant to imply "in German as Der Herr ist mein Hirte", - that these songs are used in many many languages, - how to say that?

(copied from Talk:Psalm 138) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm. There's a number of questions there. I suppose in the case of Psalm 23, the "Lord is my Shepherd" language is a well-known way of referring to it. Or with Psalm 22, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me..." For those, the incipit functions kind of like a title. I guess where I wonder most is with a Psalm like 145: "I will extol thee, my God, O king; and I will bless thy name for ever and ever." I'm not sure how many English-speakers would refer to it by that "name". I suppose my concern is that this would be a little bit like saying, "Hamlet is a play by William Shakespeare, generally known in English by it's first line, 'Who's there?'" (Not a perfect analogy, I know.)
I don't want to make trouble, though -- it's entirely possible I'm missing something here. I was just curious. Also, this quality improvement area we're in is completely unfamiliar to me. Are there any special rules or practices for this area that I should know about? Alephb (talk) 09:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Late reply: no rules, just do what you can. If you can supply English translations of the Hebrew which are NOT copyrighted (and not your own, which would make it original research) that's the biggest possible help right now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:33, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Understand. The Shakespeare comparison doesn't work, because Hamlet is a title, and primary topic is Shakekespeare's play. Psalm 22 is no title, and without saying more, some people will think of "The Lord is my Shepherd", and others of "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" - We need to make sure, and soon in the article, which one it is. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:31, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm totally with you on Psalms 22 and 23. My question is for the more obscure Psalms. In my experience (which of course is just me and doesn't count as a source or anything) these Psalms are generally referred to in speech as "Psalm Number X", and not by their first verse. I'm wondering if maybe for a Psalm like 138 we could open with something like: <<"Psalm 138 is the 138th psalm of the Book of Psalms, beginning with, "I will praise thee with my whole heart" (King James Version).>> I'd have just made the change myself to the Psalm in question if I hadn't seen a notice recently that seemed to imply there was some sort of review process needed first on Psalm articles. Alephb (talk) 06:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

To be done

For Bach compositions: BWV 2 - Psalm 12 · BWV 17 - Psalm 50 · BWV 135 - Psalm 6 · BWV 148 - Psalm 29 · BWV 104 - Psalm 80 · BWV 187 - Psalm 104 · BWV 71 - Psalm 74 · BWV 120 - Psalm 65 · BWV 171 - Psalm 48 · BWV 196 - Psalm 115 · BWV 48 - Psalm 88 · BWV 193 - Psalm 87, Psalm 121 · BWV 2 - Psalm 12 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:36, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

LouisAlain

Begun on project opera, it would be nice to monitor and improve articles started by LouisAlain, often biographies from German and French, which have suffered move to draft and various tags, because the referencing in the other Wikipedias is different, and because prose sometimes suffers in translation.

In the following table, I suggest we list articles where improvements by project members would be helpful, newest on top.

  • created - day and (short) month
  • from - two-digit language code
  • cl - class = "draft", "stub"
  • ce - copyedit
  • ref - better references
  • cv - check for copyright violation
  • DYK - "p" for planned, "nom" for nominated, later when appeared, day and (short) month
article created from cl ce ref cv DYK notes
Erich Gülzow 4 Nov de Green tickY draft to article 15 Apr 2020 by DGG
Birgit Dahlenburg 4 Nov de Green tickY draft to article 28 May 2021 by DGG
Paul Mägi 24 Oct de Green tickY draft to article 8 Mar 2020
Heinz Geese 17 Oct de stub p
Charlotte Pistorius 15 Sep de Green tickY 4 Dec move from draft 18 Oct by MurielMary
Peter Gülke 27 May de stub p
Siegfried Voß 27 May de stub draft to article 21 Jun by Sam Sailor
Roswitha Berndt 8 May de stub Green tickY draft to article 9 Nov
Elżbieta Szmytka 27 Apr de Green tickY Green tickY 30 May draft and back 27 Apr
Jon W. Finson 25 Apr de stub Red XN
Wolfgang Hirschmann 18 Apr de stub Red XN
Günther Leib 14 Apr de Green tickY Green tickY 8 Aug draft 22 Jun, exp and back by Voceditenore 23 Jun
Wolfgang Ruf 17 Apr de Red XN
Hanns-Friedrich Kunz 16 April de Green tickY Green tickY p from draft 14 Dec by Graham87
Sabine Hass 7 Apr de stub
Heinz Imdahl 6 Apr de draft Green tickY Green tickY p to draft 13 Jul
Theo Akkermann 5 Apr de draft Red XN Red XN to draft 13 Jul
Walburga Wegner 5 Apr de stub
Franz Naval 4 Apr de stub
Hermine Küchenmeister-Rudersdorf 4 Apr de stub
Erna Denera 4 Apr de stub Red XN
Henny Wolff 3 Apr de stub Red XN
Oscar Fritz Schuh 3 Apr de stub Red XN Red XN p
Anke Sieloff 2 Apr de Green tickY Green tickY 22 Aug back 28 Jun
Gabriele Rossmanith 2 Apr de stub Red XN Red XN
Leopold Ludwig 2 Apr de stub Red XN Red XN
Kurt Honolka 1 Apr de Green tickY Green tickY 5 Jan from draft 12 Nov by DGG
Peter Minich 1 Apr de stub Red XN Red XN
Julius von Raatz-Brockmann 1 Apr de stub Red XN
Hermann Gallos 31 Mar de Green tickY Green tickY p req draft to article 21 Oct, by Graham87 5 Dec
Gerhard Klingenberg 31 Mar de stub Red XN
Manuel Gervink 30 Mar de Green tickY from draft to article 1 Nov
Melanie Diener 28 Mar de Green tickY 3 Jul exp stub 27 May
Wolfgang Martin Schede 28 Mar de draft Red XN Red XN
Elisabeth Lindermeier 27 Mar de draft Green tickY p draft 1 Apr
Christian Elsner 9 Mar de Green tickY Green tickY draft 1 Apr, back 15 Apr
Bohumil Herlischka 6 Mar de C Green tickY Green tickY 11 Jul draft 1 Apr, back 10 Apr, DYKstats
Joseph Kupelwieser 6 Mar de 27 Oct drafted, created independently by WQUlrich, that one improved
Heinz Kruse 1 Jan de Green tickY Red XN
Carola Nossek 25 Dec 2018 de Green tickY Green tickY draft 26 Dec, deleted and refunded 23 Jul, back 3 Sep
Gesine Schröder 22 Dec de Green tickY Green tickY draft 25 Dec, del + back 13 Aug, article 12 Sep
Nicolas Joel 3 Dec 2018 fr Green tickY Green tickY 8 Aug draft 3 Dec, back by 97198 1 Jul

Help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

"Trademark"

Please explain the phrase "approved cabal for improvement" that hovers over the article at an angle. It does not look good, particularly on an article focusing on quality. Jmar67 (talk) 12:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

It's a reference to missed user:Br'er Rabbit (compare User talk:Br'er Rabbit/Archive#thanks for fixing my screwups) and meant to disturb. Please see the talk of WP:QAI/missed users for background, next to the image which was taken in memory. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:40, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Brian Boulton

Brian, we miss you

Brian Boulton, who died on 9 November, was not a member by registration, by what he did, and we thank him.

  • He created 106 FAs, did thorough reviews, especially source reviews which others avoid, and served as FA coordinator.
  • When some saw a battleground over infoboxes in 2013, he seeked compromise, for operas such as L'Arianna and for classical composers such as Percy Grainger.
  • He wrote a dedicated article in The Signpost of 10 July 2013.

Brian, we thank you and will remember your spirit. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Recent deaths

The project is concerned about polishing articles of people who recently died, with the goal to have them appear in the Recent deaths section whare - sadly - Peter Schreier and Harry Kupfer are as I write this. Nominations go to WP:ITNN. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:27, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

2020

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Happy New Year, Gerda Arendt! You are receiving this barnstar because, according to this Wikipedia database query, you were the #3 most thanked Wikipedian of 2019, with 1418 entries in Special:Log/thanks during 2019. Congratulations, and, well, thank you for your contributions! Cheers to 2020. Mz7 (talk) 01:12, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, Mz7that's nice, just a statistical number, but nice, especially concluding 2019, a year I designated to be the year of thanks. I thank those who thanked me, - it always feels good to receive this little token of one's work being noticed and even liked. I'll transfer the barnstar to project WP:QAI for which I work. We had three topics in 2019, and you can help (you all, I mean, member or not) to work on them:
Let's make 2020 a year of vision, together! Happy editing in 2020! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

I am passing the thanks to all - members or not - who worked for the project goals: thank you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:27, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Psalms

Begun in 2018, the project aims for the improvement of articles related to Psalms. A good example is GA Psalm 84, the most recent example Psalm 85, beginning:

Lead example

{{Psalm nr|85}}

Psalm 85
"LORD, thou hast been favourable unto thy land"
Justitia et pax (Justice and Peace) by an anonymous artist
Other name
  • "Benedixisti Domine terram tuam"
Textby Korahites
LanguageHebrew (original)

Psalm 85 is the 85th psalm of the Book of Psalms, beginning in English in the King James Version: "LORD, thou hast been favourable unto thy land". In the Greek Septuagint version of the Bible, and in the Latin Vulgate, this psalm is Psalm 84 in a slightly different numbering system. In Latin, it is known as "Benedixisti Domine terram tuam". In Judaism, it is called "a psalm of returned exiles". The psalm is attributed to the sons of Korah.

The psalm is a regular part of Jewish, Catholic, Anglican and Protestant liturgies. It was paraphrased in hymns and set to music. Its image of Justice and Peace kissing was a popular theme for artworks from the Middle Ages through the 18th century.

Explanation

Things to look for

Lead

  • the beginning in English, to make it recognizable
  • the Septuagint/Vulgate number if different
  • the beginning in Latin, traditional use, also in compositions
  • author and time if known
  • a summary of use in liturgy and music

optional: summary of content, special features, commentary, similarity/relation to other psalms

Text and theme

It is nice to have at least some text, in Hebrew and English. Unfortunately, a 2019 discussion resulted in the removal of the direct translation from Hebrew. The English King James Version is Wikipedia's free source, but is often old-fashioned English, and deviating in meaning. Such differences need to pointed out specifically, - not as would be conbvenient by having two translations next to each other.

For some psalms, the verse numbering is different, this should also be mentioned.

Liturgical use

Subdivided by denominations

Musical settings

This section can get very long, then consider a list or table. If hymns are derived from the psalm they should come first, because often other music is based on them.

External links

Typical links are given - as a model - for Psalm 85:

Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Wikimedia Commons has media related to WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Archive 1.

To be done

For Bach compositions: BWV 2 - Psalm 12 · BWV 17 - BWV 48 - Psalm 88 · BWV 71 - Psalm 74 · BWV 120 - Psalm 65 · BWV 135 - Psalm 6 · BWV 148 - Psalm 29 · BWV 171 - Psalm 48 · BWV 187 - Psalm 104 · BWV 193 - Psalm 87 · BWV 196 - Psalm 115 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Also for Elijah (oratorio): Psalm 7 · Psalm 16 · Psalm 25 · Psalm 34 · Psalm 59 · Psalm 71 · Psalm 86 · Psalm 88 · Psalm 108 · Psalm 128 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:16, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

LouisAlain

Begun in 2019 on project opera, we monitor and improve articles started by prolific translator LouisAlain, often biographies from German and French, which have suffered move to draft and various tags, because the referencing in the other Wikipedias is different, and because prose sometimes suffers in translation.

In the following table, I suggest we list articles where improvements by project members would be helpful, newest on top.

  • created - day and (short) month
  • from - two-digit language code
  • cl - class = "draft", "stub"
  • ce - copyedit
  • ref - better references
  • cv - check for copyright violation
  • DYK - "p" for planned, "nom" for nominated, later when appeared, day and (short) month

2020

article created from cl ce ref DYK notes
Draft:Yves Robert (musician) 6 Feb fr draft Green tickY Green tickY by Helohe
Reinhard Pfundt 2 Jun de Green tickY Green tickY draft to article 4 Jun by Robert McClenon
Karl Friedrich (tenor) 2 Oct 2019 de Green tickY draft to article 27 Aug by Calliopejen1

2019

article created from cl ce ref DYK notes
Erich Gülzow 4 Nov 2019 de Green tickY draft to article 15 Apr by DGG
Birgit Dahlenburg 4 Nov 2019 de Green tickY draft to article 28 May 2021 by DGG
Franz Klarwein 3 Nov 2019 de Green tickY 16 May from draft 7 Apr by El C
Paul Mägi 24 Oct 2019 de Green tickY 13 Apr from draft 8 Mar by Estopedist1
Heinz Geese 17 Oct 2019 de stub p
Peter Gülke 27 May 2019 de stub p
Siegfried Voß 27 May 2019 de stub from draft 21 Jun 2019 by Sam Sailor
Anja Augustin 6 May 2019 de Green tickY from draft 17 Mar by El C
Jon W. Finson 25 Apr 2019 de stub Red XN
Wolfgang Hirschmann 18 Apr 2019 de stub Red XN
Wolfgang Ruf 17 Apr 2019 de Red XN
Hanns-Friedrich Kunz 16 Apr 2019 de Green tickY Green tickY from draft 14 Dec 2019 by Graham87
Sabine Hass 7 Apr 2019 de stub
Heinz Imdahl 6 Apr 2019 de Green tickY Green tickY 24 Apr to draft 13 Jul, back 28 Mar by DGG
Theo Akkermann 5 Apr 2019 de Green tickY Green tickY p to draft 13 Jul 2019, back 20 Jun
Walburga Wegner 5 Apr 2019 de stub
Franz Naval 4 Apr 2019 de stub
Hermine Küchenmeister-Rudersdorf 4 Apr 2019 de stub
Erna Denera 4 Apr 2019 de stub Red XN
Henny Wolff 3 Apr 2019 de stub Green tickY 16 Apr
Oscar Fritz Schuh 3 Apr 2019 de stub Red XN Red XN p
Gabriele Rossmanith 2 Apr 2019 de stub Red XN Red XN
Leopold Ludwig 2 Apr 2019 de stub Red XN Red XN
Peter Minich 1 Apr 2019 de stub Green tickY Green tickY 22 Apr expanded by Charles01 12 Mar
Julius von Raatz-Brockmann 1 Apr 2019 de stub Red XN
Gerhard Klingenberg 31 Mar 2019 de stub Red XN
Carl Michalski 29 Mar 2019 de Green tickY Green tickY from draft 9 Mar by El C
Wolfgang Martin Schede 28 Mar 2019 de draft Green tickY Red XN
Elisabeth Lindermeier 27 Mar 2019 de Green tickY 25 Apr draft 1 Apr 2019, back 9 Mar
Heinz Kruse 1 Jan 2019 de Green tickY Red XN

Articles Nicolas Joel, Joseph Kupelwieser, Bohumil Herlischka, Melanie Diener, Kurt Honolka, Anke Sieloff, Elżbieta Szmytka and Charlotte Pistorius were rescued in 2019 and appeared on DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:39, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Recent deaths

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Recent deaths

Begun in 2019, the project is concerned about the quality of articles of people who recently died and listed here:

  • work on tags
  • references
  • expansion

When the quality is good enough, they can appear in the Recent deaths section of the Main page. Nominations go to WP:ITNN. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:55, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Margit Otto-Crépin

Margit Otto-Crépin died, article of an equestrien silver-medal winner is a stub. I know little, even the German article isn't great. Montanabw, for equestrian? LouisAlain, for French? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Brian Boulton

Brian, we miss you

Brian Boulton, who died on 9 December 2019, was not a member by registration, by what he did, and we thank him.

  • He created 106 FAs, did thorough reviews, especially source reviews which others avoid, and served as FA coordinator.
  • When some saw a battleground over infoboxes in 2013, he seeked compromise, for operas such as L'Arianna and for classical composers such as Percy Grainger.
  • He wrote a dedicated article in The Signpost of 10 July 2013.

Brian, we thank you and will remember your spirit. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Add them to articles that you write yourself. Ignore discussions, ignore ignore ignore. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:49, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

This is why there are problems
The reason why there are problems surrounding infoboxes is because of stupid remarks like this. When analysed, you're basically saying, add a box and ignore the rules. Who's the disruptive one? Not me. CassiantoTalk 15:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
What in the clause "that you write yourself" is hard to understand? We can get wordier if needed:
  • Feel free to add an infobox ONLY if you wrote the article yourself.
  • If you are not an article's principal editor, best leave the right corner as you find it.
  • If you can't resist the urge to change it - adding or removing - be prepared to be reverted and then better walk away.
  • If you plan to become an article's principal editor, be polite and suggest a change on the talk.
  • Don't waste time in infobox discussions.
Write articles. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Nope, no one OWNS an article; it is subject to discussion and consensus, with BRD being the way to go (with those adding an infobox being the bold edit). CassiantoTalk 16:58, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Not owning is a nice theory, but hasn't worked. I could give you past examples, but we could also look at a better future. - I have heard your idea of declaring an edit which established a feature that readers became used to over many years suddenly as "bold" years later, but I don't follow. - Tell me, where do you even see "problems surrounding infoboxes"? Name one or two, please, just article name. (Because I don't see any.) - Different topic: I hear a lot about Brian's spirit. I don't remember him calling the edits of others "disruptive" or "stupid", at least not to me. I remember him as the person who tried compromise. A good model. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:16, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
It's not my idea, it's from the school of Common Sense. You have to add an infobox for it to be removed. Bold comes before revert. Why is that so difficult to understand? CassiantoTalk 19:45, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Let's see. I believe that you have a different concept of "revert" than I have. We don't revert things, we revert edits. When a vandal removes a paragraph, I revert which then means adding. If a vandal writes something indecent, I revert which then means removing.
Let's look at an example. Franz Mazura. On 24 Jan, LeQuattroStagioni added a table for the recordings. Someone more prose-oriented might not like it, and revert as bold. I agree that this would be acceptable within a week, perhaps even two, but to remove that table in 2027 would make no sense to me.
Imagine that everybody, regarding infoboxes, only cared about the articles he or she creates, and leaves those of others alone - and this is what I suggested in my "stupid" edit - we'd have an outbreak of peace. Perhaps try it? - In case you don't know: "ignore ignore ignore" is a quote, of the best advice I ever received on Wikipedia, in 2012, before I even knew about infoboxes. I should have listened more often. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:12, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm afraid I can't quite understand most of that, but I feel we're not going to agree anyway, so let's leave things there. CassiantoTalk 22:26, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
You mean you leave, and still call my edit which was meant as a suggestion for peace "stupid"? Why is it so difficult to understand why a removal of the recordings table in 2027 would not make sense to me? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
How is it peaceful adding warring an infobox in place and then refusing to discuss with others when it is reverted? That's a recipe for disaster. Because you were bold, it got reverted, and you should discuss. There is no time limit. CassiantoTalk 22:47, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
I don't think you like to answer questions. I count four just above that you didn't answer, one of them being where you see a problem, such as "adding warring", - because I don't see it. Where was I bold? (To begin with.) - There was no serious infobox conflict for three years, - I almost forgot the topic infoboxes when I wrote this project's plans for 2020: Psalms - LouisAlain - Recent deaths. - When I remembered that "we" are known for infoboxes I added one line. Where is "adding warring" if everybody stays with self-made articles? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Advice for peace (of mind)

As you see that the above was thoroughly misunderstood, a more wordy version of the same, as can be found on the talk of SilkTork:

Advice (or warning), dear user who may think an infobox is a normal feature of an article, passing at-a-glance information to a reader who may need no more:

  • When you see a featured article (FA, with a little star in the upper right corner) without an infobox, there is a reason. You waste less time (not only yours but those of fellow editors) by not even thinking to change the status.
  • If you can't resist the thought, and see the hidden notice not to add an infobox, withdraw.
  • If you are still on some mission, add one but unwatch the article (as said in the thread above).
  • If you keep watching and see it reverted, best ignore.
  • If you can't ignore, begin a talk page discussion, per WP:BRD.

Same is true for normal articles, of course, but the more FA, the longer the discussion will be. Consider to instead work against this backlog, seriously. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:58, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

2021

calling heaven and earth to be glad

Welcome to 2021, hopefully a year of taking courage and encouragement!

Ongoing projects:

Thanks to all - member or not - who worked for the project goals in 2020! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Bach cantatas

Project members have worked towrads improving the quality of articles about Bach's cantatas which come from stub to FA such as Erschallet, ihr Lieder, erklinget, ihr Saiten! BWV 172. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

General check

  • For articles with long German titles, begin the lead with the known composer:
    Johann Sebastian Bach composed the church cantata Die Elenden sollen essen (The miserable shall eat), BWV 75, in Leipzig for the first Sunday after Trinity and first performed it on 30 May 1723.
  • For articles with short titles rather use:
    The Magnificat in E-flat major, BWV 243a, also BWV 243.1, is a choral composition by Johann Sebastian Bach.
  • "BWV" should be bold and not linked, to make the redirect clearly visible
  • Infobox: no "File:" needed for images, no links for instruments
  • Mark foreign-language text with {{lang}}, which (now) renders that text italic, unless prevented by "italic=no" or "italic=unset" for items, where italics are only for parts
  • Link uncommon terms on first occurrence in both lead and body: [[stanza]] · [[Movement (music)|movement]] · [[Bach cantata]] · [[Libretto|librettist]] · [[Old Testament]] · [[New Testament]] [[Baroque instruments|Baroque instrumental]] ensemble · [[Bach's first cantata cycle]] and similar terms
  • Link an occasion to the liturgical occasion in Church cantata which has the readings, which is usually more helpful than a general article
  • Watch for chronology: first compose, then perform
  • link Dahn chorales 
    * Luke Dahn: [http://www.bach-chorales.com/BWV0125_6.htm BWV 125.6] bach-chorales.com
  • Take the article from a highly developed article: level 2 Music, level 3 Structure and scoring + Movements
  • Mention original title if available
  • Mention duration if available

References

Recordings

  • Avoid "Selected"
  • Use simple introduction
  • Use choir type only if OVPP recordings exist
  • Avoid mentioning "sortable"
  • Supply a name for a table of recordings
  • Avoid red background
  • Check for new recordings
  • Do not rely on BCW alone

Images

  • Excellent: Bach's autograph manuscripts
  • Good: instruments, performers, prints of hymns, performance places
  • Avoid: the image of Young Bach as doubtful, and the image of Old Bach unless it's a late work

Good article (GA)

  • Expand lead
  • Make tables of both movements and recordings

Featured article (FA)

  • Insert sections background, publication and reception
  • Word alt text for images
  • Have subheaders for movements, provide incipit and translation for each, use toc limit

Translations

Begun in 2019 on project opera, we monitor and improve articles started by prolific translator LouisAlain, often biographies from German and French, which have suffered move to draft and various tags, because the referencing in the other Wikipedias is different, and because prose sometimes suffers in translation.

In the following table, I suggest we list articles where improvements by project members would be helpful, newest on top.

  • created - day and (short) month
  • from - two-digit language code
  • cl - class = "draft", "stub"
  • ce - copyedit
  • ref - better references
  • cv - check for copyright violation
  • DYK - "p" for planned, "nom" for nominated, later when appeared, day and (short) month

2020

article created from cl ce ref DYK notes
Yves Robert (musician) 6 Feb 2020 fr Green tickY Green tickY by Helohe, from draft by El C 13 Jan 2021

Several articles were rescued in 2020, and some appeared on DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Recent deaths

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Recent deaths

Begun in 2019, the project is concerned about the quality of articles of people who recently died and listed here:

  • work on tags
  • references
  • expansion

When the quality is good enough soon enough, an article can appear in the Recent deaths section of the Main page, with nominations to WP:ITNN. A new or sufficiently expanded article can (also) appear on DYK --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

2022

Psalms

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Psalms

Begun in 2018, the project aims for the improvement of articles related to Psalms. A good example is GA Psalm 84, but Psalm 85 is also a fine example:

Lead example

{{Psalm nr|85}}

Psalm 85
"LORD, thou hast been favourable unto thy land"
Justitia et pax (Justice and Peace) by an anonymous artist
Other name
  • "Benedixisti Domine terram tuam"
Textby Korahites
LanguageHebrew (original)

Psalm 85 is the 85th psalm of the Book of Psalms, beginning in English in the King James Version: "LORD, thou hast been favourable unto thy land". In the Greek Septuagint version of the Bible, and in the Latin Vulgate, this psalm is Psalm 84 in a slightly different numbering system. In Latin, it is known as "Benedixisti Domine terram tuam". In Judaism, it is called "a psalm of returned exiles". The psalm is attributed to the sons of Korah.

The psalm is a regular part of Jewish, Catholic, Anglican and Protestant liturgies. It was paraphrased in hymns and set to music. Its image of Justice and Peace kissing was a popular theme for artworks from the Middle Ages through the 18th century.

Explanation

Things to look for

Lead

  • the beginning in English, to make it recognizable
  • the Septuagint/Vulgate number if different
  • the beginning in Latin, traditional use, also in compositions
  • author and time if known
  • a summary of use in liturgy and music

optional: summary of content, special features, commentary, similarity/relation to other psalms

Text and theme

It is nice to have at least some text, in Hebrew and English. Unfortunately, a 2019 discussion resulted in the removal of the direct translation from Hebrew. The English King James Version is Wikipedia's free source, but is often old-fashioned English, and deviating in meaning. Such differences need to pointed out specifically, - not as would be convenient by having two translations next to each other.

For some psalms, the verse numbering is different, this should also be mentioned.

Liturgical use

Subdivided by denominations

Musical settings

This section can get very long, then consider a list or table. If hymns are derived from the psalm they should come first, because often other music is based on them.

External links

Typical links are given - as a model - for Psalm 85:

Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Wikimedia Commons has media related to WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Archive 1.

To be done

For Bach compositions: BWV 2 - Psalm 12 · BWV 48 - Psalm 88 · BWV 71 - Psalm 74 · BWV 120 - Psalm 65 · BWV 135 - Psalm 6 · BWV 148 - Psalm 29 · BWV 171 - Psalm 48 · BWV 193 - Psalm 87

Also for Elijah (oratorio): Psalm 7 Green tickY · Psalm 16 · Psalm 34 · Psalm 59 · Psalm 86 Green tickY· Psalm 88 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Infoboxes

It's a myth that project members are fanatic about infoboxes ;) - The typical member will add them to articles as a different level of accessibility. It is safe to add one to a self-made article, and a waste of time to discuss them with those who don't like them.

Advice for peace (of mind)

If you think an infobox is a normal feature of an article, passing at-a-glance information to a reader who may need no more, please respect the following:

  • When you see a featured article (FA, with a little star in the upper right corner) without an infobox, there is a reason. You waste less time (not only yours but those of fellow editors) by not even thinking to change the status.
  • If you can't resist the thought of adding one, but see a hidden notice in edit mode not to add an infobox (without a proposal on the talk), withdraw.
  • If you are still on some mission, add one but unwatch the article.
  • If you keep watching and see it reverted, best ignore.
  • If you can't ignore, begin a talk page discussion, per WP:BRD.

The same is true for normal articles, of course, but the more FA, the longer the discussion will be. Consider to instead work against this backlog, seriously. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Gnomish tasks

  • Checking for spelling mistakes
  • Checking for unclosed new-line html <br>, replace by <br />
  • Checking for direct links to foreign-language Wikipedias, replace by {{ill}}
  • Applying {{lang}} to foreign-language text
  • Observing WP:Colons and asterisks by RexxS, and make others do the same
  • Providing navboxes, especially for operas which so far had sidebars, and providing images or infoboxes instead of deleted sidebars
  • Replacing deprecated {{harv}} by {{sfn}}
  • Checking deletion proposals

Feel free to add to this everywhere, list your articles for review, chat. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

New article improvement newsletter

Dropping a line on the talk pages of relevant WikiProjects that a new article improvement newsletter has opened for sign-ups and is sending out its first issue in the next couple of days. Discontent Content focuses on both the improvement of substandard articles and the maintenance of quality ones, and can be subscribed to at Wikipedia:Discontent Content/mailing list. Vaticidalprophet 05:21, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

"Approved cabal for improvement"?

This Talk page is unlike any I have seen before and appears to be used more as a guide. I hope this is the correct place to put this message.

While reading the project page, I noticed a very odd... I don't know what to call it. Typographic anomaly? The phrase "approved cabal for improvement" appears as apparently floating text, rotated upward about 15°, moving to different locations of the page when I view the project's page, its text source, or an old revision. On the main project page itself, at least on my monitor, the text appears in the Scope section, obscuring the word the in "several members are female, and the others also care..." (Emphasis mine, to show placement.) If my written description is unclear, let me know so I can provide a screenshot.

If this text is intentional, might I suggest changing its display to be a consistent position? If its position I described above is intentional, might I suggest a different term than cabal? The position and wording of the text seem to imply feminists belong to a cabal, which I hope is not the intended message. While the term's usage is technically accurate, according to the Merriam–Webster dictionary,[notes 1] the term often carries a negative connotation.[notes 2] If it's meant to be a humorous way of defining the group, I still feel it might be a wise idea to anchor the text somewhere.
~ JDCAce | user | talk | contributions ~ 05:16, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

JDCAce, please see if the thread in the archive (below the TOC) under the same title tells you enough, about memory of a missed friend and founder of this project. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:12, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
I appreciate the quick response. I suppose since I am only the second person to be confused by this in seven years, it's probably not important to change it. You and the group at large have my condolences.
~ JDCAce | user | talk | contributions ~ 07:19, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Notes

  1. ^ Definition 2: club, group[1]
  2. ^ Definition 1: the contrived schemes of a group of persons secretly united in a plot (as to overturn a government); also: a group engaged in such schemes[1]

References

  1. ^ a b "Definition of Cabal". Merriam–Webster. Retrieved 4 September 2021.

Crazy idea, but...

100,000 feature-quality articles? CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 08:55, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

we are not counting ;) - begin with listing yours for review on top, and comment on those listed --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:12, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
I am preparing, since the article is clearly still missing something... typical for stuff related to Elon Musk tweets and private spaceflight. It is difficult to say the least. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 09:18, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
no rush, enjoy building! - do some reviewing, please, that introduces you to the TFA people you will have to convince, not Jesu, meine Freude (has enough support) but those missing comments --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:27, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Alright! I will review some :) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 10:09, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

2022

Welcome to 2022, hopefully a year of friendship!

Ongoing projects:

Thanks to all - member or not - who worked for the project goals in 2021! It was especially great for new writers of featured articles (FA):

That's promising! Let's keep writing and reviewing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

In 2022: more new FAs by new writers:

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:30, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:48, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Next psalms

To be done:

Gnomish tasks

  • Checking for spelling mistakes
  • Checking for unclosed new-line html <br>, replace by <br />
  • Checking for direct links to foreign-language Wikipedias, replace by {{ill}}
  • Applying {{lang}} to foreign-language text
  • Observing WP:Colons and asterisks by RexxS, and make others do the same
  • Replacing deprecated {{harv}} by {{sfn}}
  • Checking deletion proposals

Feel free to add to this everywhere, list your articles for review, chat. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

SpaceX?

2023

Welcome to 2023, hopefully a year of resilience!

Ongoing projects:

In 2022, new writers brought articles to FA, and (some of them) TFA:

Gnomish tasks include:

  • check for spelling mistakes
  • check for links to current countries, capitals, languages, and remove them, per WP:OVERLINK
  • check for unclosed new-line html <br>, replace by <br />
  • check for direct links to foreign-language Wikipedias, replace by {{ill}}
  • apply {{lang}} to foreign-language text
  • observe WP:Colons and asterisks by RexxS, and make others do the same
  • replace deprecated {{harv}} by {{sfn}}
  • check if talk page headers fulfill the function for which they were meant: guidance on contentious pages.

Infoboxes:

  • Project members generally welcome infoboxes, as a means of WP:Accessibility, but don't pursue them against known wishes by principal editors, per User:RexxS/Infobox factors by RexxS. All RfCs of recent years supported the use of a concise infobox over no infobox, last (and only in 2022): Laurence Olivier. It would be nice if the term "infobox warrior" would become unused in 2023.

Feel free to add to this, list your articles for review, chat. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)


Cannot find member userbox to put on my userpage

I have not been able to find a member userbox for this WikiProject to put onto my userpage. I made a proposal here:[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Userboxes/New_Userboxes&oldid=1161471362] Perhaps others could help out. I'm not an expert at creating userboxes.

Thanks, GloryRoad66 (talk) 23:07, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

I came up with one (for at least the time being:
This user is a participant in
QAI
(Quality Article Improvement).
But, I welcome anyone to improve its design. GloryRoad66 (talk) 05:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
Here is the page if anyone wants to edit the userbox.[1] GloryRoad66 (talk) 07:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
I just made a few more modifications to the design of the userbox (see above), so that now the it better reflects the visual themes presented on the main page of this WikiProject. I found a better template format that allows for the use of phots and images. You'll notice that the userbox now has the beautiful sunset photo and the orange border. If you have any further improvements you wish to make, you can go to Template:User WikiProject Quality Article Improvement. GloryRoad66 (talk) 22:18, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

10 years

In 2023, it's been 10 years that we had WP:arbinfobox, which is also 10 years of growing openness for the insight that composers are also human beings, - see 10 years. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

As it's ongoing, here's the list, begun on 15 March:

article diff by user date discussion notes
Astor Piazzolla add IP 12 Sep 2007
Robert Zollitsch (composer) create Galanga 12 Sep 2010
Rolf Liebermann add Lugnuts 9 Mar 2011
Étienne Méhul add Magnus Manske 12 Jul 2012
Clara Schumann add Sixtyseemonkey 12 Sep 2012
George Gershwin add Hhfjbaker 28 Nov 2012
Ilse Weber add Kschlot1 16 Nov 2012
Robert Stoepel add kosboot 4 Mar 2013 disc
Peter Planyavsky start Gerda Arendt 4 Mar 2013
Erwin Schulhoff add Aarp65 11 Sep 2013
Percy Grainger experiment Brian Boulton 29 Oct 2013
Dmitry Bortniansky risk Duckduckstop 24 Feb 2014
Imogen Holst add Brian Boulton 12 Mar 2014
Erich Wolfgang Korngold add IP 3 Sep 2014
Albert Ketèlbey add Abc2266 28 Jan 2015
Frédéric Chopin RfC consensus Brian Boulton 19 Feb 2015 2014, 2015, 2022 restored in 2023
Anton Rubinstein add Tetsuo 10 Mar 2015
Javier Álvarez add TobiasAD 26 Apr 2015
Ludwig van Beethoven RfC consensus Worm That Turned 7 July 2015 RfC
Aram Khachaturian add Marcus1093 14 May 2015
Leonard Bernstein add IP 22 Aug 2015
Edvard Grieg add IP 5 Sep 2015
Johann Sebastian Bach add Nyetoson 14 Oct 2015 disc 2013
Zacharia Paliashvili add Damianmx 14 Jan 2016
Gian Carlo Menotti add Apokrifos 28 Jan 2016
Carl Orff add BPK2 2 May 2016
Max Reger try Gerda Arendt 9 May 2016 disc
Maxim Berezovsky add Shiesmine 12 Feb 2017
Robert Schumann add Nmtri2007 13 May 2017
Max Bruch add Ezhao02 21 Jul 2017
Alexander Scriabin add Railfan01 21 Sep 2017
John Cage add Cs california 3 Feb 2018
Ferdinando Paer try Gerda Arendt 27 Apr 2018
Andrée Vaurabourg add Peaceray 23 Jun 2018
Carl Friedrich Rungenhagen add Bonnie13J 10 March 2019
Ethel Smyth add WomenArtistUpdates 6 May 2019
Johann Strauss II add Makkkkus 25 Jan 2020
Jörg Widmann try Gerda Arendt 6 Feb 2020
Judith Weir add Willwal1 17 Mar 2020
Elena Kats-Chernin add Maryphillips1952 23 Sep 2020
Amy Beach created Maryphillips1952 24 Sep 2020
Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji per PR comments Toccata quarta 23 Nov 2020
George Enescu add RAMSES$44932 14 Apr 2021
Paul Hindemith add Gerda Arendt 20 May 2021
Nadia Boulanger add Evanszoe 21 Jun 2021
Franz Liszt add Chariotsacha 18 Jul 2021
Henryk Wieniawski add JeffreyViolin 31 Jul 2021
Jean Sibelius try Gerda Arendt 8 Dec 2021 disc
Ernst Krenek add Moshtrofontz 20 Jan 2022
Darius Milhaud add Valentinejoesmith 27 Jan 2022
György Kurtág add Mandtplatt 22 Feb 2022
Karol Szymanowski add IP 4 Apr 2022
Heitor Villa-Lobos add Thi 22 Jun 2022
Artemy Vedel add Gerda Arendt 9 Sep 2022
Boris Blacher add Toadboy123 26 Sep 2022
Anton Webern add MONTENSEM 7 Oct 2022
Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky RfC consensus Shibbolethink 5 Jan 2023 RfC
Carl Maria von Weber add Mabcmiller 15 Jan 2023
Sergei Prokofiev add Pearman2 16 Feb 2023
Johannes Brahms finally Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov 24 Feb 2023
Alban Berg add Engineerchange 26 Feb 2023
Zoltán Kodály add Dseay2 3 Mar 2023
Igor Stravinsky add MyCatIsAChonk 9 Mar 2023
Carl Nielsen add Silence of Järvenpää 29 Mar 2023 disc
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart RfC consensus Shibbolethink 30 Mar 2023 RfC
Giacomo Puccini no objection UndercoverClassicist 3 Jun 2023
Clarence Barlow add IP 29 Jun 2023
Revaz Lagidze create LeontinaVarlamonva 3 Jul 2023
Dmitri Shostakovich add EthanCheung19 5 Jul 2023
Richard Wagner RfC consensus PackMecEng 5 Aug 2023 RfC
Serge Koussevitzky add Dronebogus 1 Aug 2023
Alfred Schnittke restore CurryTime7-24 10 Aug 2023
Felix Mendelssohn RfC consensus PackMecEng 11 Aug 2023 RfC

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:59, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

last update: --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:05, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Boy Scouts of America

... is up for GA reassassment. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

and delisted --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:34, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Quality_Article_Improvement/Archive_1&oldid=1194308983"