Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikify/Drives/2012/February

Tag clarification

The main drive pages reads:

"This drive is a one-month long effort by WikiProject Wikify to reduce the backlog of articles that need to be wikified, which are tagged with {{wikify}} and {{Dead end}}."

{{Wikify}} and {{dead end}} do not appear to be the same thing. I just edited an article that had the dead end tag, but it had no {{wikify}}. Rather, it had the {{multiple issues}} tag along with orphan, linkrot, dead end, etc. Just wanted to clarify, but I'm guessing this is allowed onto the tracking list.

Cheers! Encycloshave (talk) 18:22, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

That's correct; {{wikify}} is a much broader tag, while {{dead end}} specifically refers to a lack of internal wiki-links. Some articles have both, others have only one. Either is allowed. Hope that answers your question. :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 18:32, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

A learning experience

I hate to start an editorial war because this kind of behavior is called 'distruptive' in Wikipedia but for an outsider this isn't funny. You see i am somebody who spends hours on an article to Wikify it but then i have only got so far as five articles. So I think why not take inspiration from some of out leaderboard toppers and see how the champions do it. I went to the five top pages of Assassin'S creed and I have pasted a gallery of screen shots of what I see. You see what this user has done is add Wikify tags and then delete them, all on the same day. So now I know where those hundreds of articles are coming from. Now I know there are tons of Wikipedia poicy that editors will start sprouting and say that all this is OK and maybe its even encouraged under some arcane Wikipedia policy for some reason or the other and maybe someone will even ask to me to take a break, but you dont have to worry about all that! I am leaving this drive and since all of you Wikipedians have such a fantastic sense of humor, just laugh at my stupidity. With all Due Respects Goodbye!

A Screen shot of the article history	A Screen shot of the article history
A Screen shot of the article history	A Screen shot of the article history
A Screen shot of the article history

Wikishagnik (talk) 16:49, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm sorry you feel that way - we need every good editor we can get. :( Unfortunately, that's not actually what AC is doing....see, he usually wikifies an article in one edit, then removes the tag in another. Could he do both in one edit? Sure, but that really doesn't affect us. However, AC is not wikifying articles he has added the {{wikify}} template to. Look at your first image, and the edit right before AC's first. The last part of the edit summary reads "added wikify tag using AWB" and the edit was made by User:Hmains. Hmains added the template back in November and AC wikified it on February 1st. AC may be only wikifying short articles...in fact, I'm sure (without even looking at his submissions) he is. That's certainly not against the rules...if you only want to wikify short articles, that's fine. However, he isn't tagging and editing articles on the same day. I hope you'll join us again - we'll have a spot open for you :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:32, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

• What AC is doing is only remove the wikify tag from the article without touching the actual article. Please refer the screen shot below. Thats not what project wikify is all about, right? And please do go through the revision history as I am tired of taking screen shots and I don't have the means to make a YouTube video.

Wikishagnik (talk) 22:00, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

No, that's not what wikifying is about, but that's not what he's doing either. Yes, in this edit to Ayaz Amir he only removes the wikify tag, but one minute earlier, in this edit, he actually does do some work. Same with Anger Engineering Company. I'll leave him a note reminding him not to take credit for articles that he basically does nothing to, but I don't think you're right in assuming that all (or even a large portion) of his articles are like that. Also, no need for more screenshots...just tell me what article and I can look for it myself :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 22:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Wow! This guys is a genius. Just at this example. All he has done is provided wikilinks for words like India and Malayalam. Here he is Wikifying terms like United States and sweater shirts (which specifically not encouraged in the Wikify template)to justify the removal of the Wikify tag. I guess he just found out the quick and dirty way of staying on top of the leader board. However, this example he has actually edited sections - without adding anything to those sections, of course - which is not even a requirement of the wikify campaign, but I guess we all have to pitch in to remove those tags, right? Somewhere in my confusion and ignorance I forgot to deeply investigate what was bothering me so I ended up adding too many screenshots. Bye!--Wikishagnik (talk) 05:57, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikishagnik i must say that expanding the articles you worked on (such as Brand piracy) is really great and worth all the recognition you can get. However it isn't specifically required as a criterion for the drive, so AC doesn't have to do it. All he has to do is go through all the steps on the {{wikify}} tag. Based on the examples you gave, i have checked out what he has done (click [show]) :

I think there has been some kind of misunderstanding here. I just hope it can be resolved… ~ benzband (talk) 13:11, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh my goodness... Wikishagnik, that is a fantastic expansion, but is definitely not required during the wikification of an article. Articles are usually tagged with {{wikify}} because they either don't have enough links, or there aren't any section headers and the article needs to be better organized. That is roughly what AC has done, and I'm sorry, but that's really all he's required to do. Wikification is very newbie-friendly, and hey - someone still has to wikify those really short articles. Again, I hope this misunderstanding can be cleared up, because we would love to have an editor of your caliber join us. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 14:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Consensus: Here is a summary of what I have understood is the consensus on my issue. For the wikify drive we don't have to add content on the article or do any additional research (i.e. expand it). All we should worry about is

• Are there any section headers missing?
• Are their any bare HTML Tags?
• Can we wikify some terms? (Even if it means creating wikilinks for United States and Sweaters)

We don't have to worry about the lead and most importantly, meeting any one of the above parameters is sufficient to declare the article is wikified. We dont have to do all of the above. Agree / Disagree?--Wikishagnik (talk) 12:13, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

You are right that adding content is not required, but your three bullet points are only the absolute minimum that should be done for an extensive wikifying. (And remember that just because expansion isn't required doesn't mean that some of us don't do it. Here's one that User:Ruby2010 did - a full expansion. I also usually end up doing a full copyediting on the articles I wikify.) See Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikify/Drives/Instructions#Ten simple steps to thoroughly wikify an article for a more definitive ten step process. It's not that meeting any one of those three is enough to consider an article wikified, but as often as not, it's all that needs to be done on these really short articles. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 14:11, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Not sure I agree with not worrying about the lead paragraph. The wikify banner reads: "Format the lead. Create or improve the lead paragraph." Thus, we do worry about the lead. Also, it suggests adding an infobox, if appropriate. That is subjective. My philosophy on that is that if an infobox template exists for the topic, add one, e.g. for author Victor Bridges add {{infobox writer}}. If there is only enough information for the name and occupation, e.g. Cecelie Berry, follow the Wikipedia red link philosophy of build the link and they will come. Looking at the history, Assassin's creed wikified both those articles. The first, he did not add an infobox, while the second one he did. The Victor Bridges article contains more data than the Berry article. Why the difference? Ask AC.

As for section headers, I believe the references section is pretty important, though WP:MOS states they are optional. As there is so much emphasis on citing information, and there are quite a few templates for marking inadequate citations, adding this section ought to be one of the tasks. But that's merely my opinion, thus I add it.

We might want to address the instructions given in the drive's instructions on what to do. These are steps on how to thoroughly wikify an article, which are beyond what the banner states. Are they required for the drive? Another thing to remember is that the Wikify drive is for fixing those articles with the {{dead end}} tag. Thus for those tags, none of the above is required. Though if the article needs the banner or needs fixing, and you don't do anything, well may you have nightmares of getting chased by zombies throwing barnstars at you. Encycloshave (talk) 14:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

<removed> I don't think, I am doing some mistakes deliberately, those happen because I am human. Just tell me one time I'll improve it, but thanks for all of this. Thank you Nolelover (especially).-- Assassin'S Creed ^{T - E - C - G -} 21:34, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Let me note that before the 3G were introduced, the award system was based on word-count rather than article-count. Also, the point is really to wikify articles in a friendly and fun way, not to compete and fraud and backstab and so on and forth. Let's not forget the spirit of the thing. The awards are just a distraction to focus editors on the task. That's all. benzband (talk) 11:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Exactly. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 15:26, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Failure

Is it me or is the current progress bar actually going backwards? I think the goal was a bit too far out to be reached. But then again, a bit of optimism can't do any harm (1300 goal sound good? :) benzband (talk) 11:23, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, ouch, wow. We lost 10 percentage points in a day? :( As to the goal...well, it never seems to be right...In one drive we wikified over a thousand articles in a few days, and because the goal was achieved so fast everyone stopped halfway....and we went back down again. In a perfect world we'd like to be finishing with at least 50-75% of our goal, if it's on the larger side, but yeah...1300 ay be too much for future drives. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 14:02, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Hey! this is it, I am thinking about a special drive (March Mini as in 2011) next month. What do you (Nolelover & Benzband) say about that? In this way we'll complete some percent of our goal.-- Assassin'S Creed ^{T - E - C - G -} 20:04, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

If anyone wants to set that up (the second annual March Mini) that fine, but I'll probably be offline for much of March on a late vacation so I can't participate. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, its OK, I'll set up that just tell me something about setting up the design and layout for the March Mini drive.-- Assassin'S Creed ^{T - E - C - G -} 07:43, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, i'm happy to help set it up if you need my assistance. As i get it it's just a copy-paste-update of the latest "mini" drive's pages? benzband (talk) 09:36, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

I've been bold and drafted up some drive pages at WP:WikiProject Wikify/Drives/2012/March Mini, /Log, /Track and Invite. They're just some kind of proposal (can be changed or trashed at will :) benzband (talk) 11:09, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks man, good job. I did some Changes in Invite. Good luck to March Mini 2012.-- Assassin'S Creed ^{T - E - C - G -} 11:37, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Bleh, something else has come up. Really quickly, though, I suggest (a) posting about this on the main WWF talk page (b) notifying everyone who participated here plus people who have recently participated in a drive by hand when you pass out the barnstars for this drive (MessageDelivBot doesn't seem to work...I submitted a form the day before this drive and am yet to see it, so add a note to the barnstar, outside the actual template though, use the invite inviting them to the MM) (c) drop all barnstar reqs by one; since these March Minis only last 15 days, have bronze be for 10-29, silver for 30-59, etc. Just my two cents. Cheers, Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 15:26, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, i'll set about the task shortly (next few days). Cheers, benzband (talk) 16:40, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Check out the main talk page for updates, i also propose (per Nolelover) that any further comments be posted there. Best(est :) -- benzband (talk) 19:27, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Amabile Choirs of London, Canada

I am not sure of your processes here, but I request that you Wikify Amabile Choirs of London, Canada as part of your February 2012 Drive. As a WP:GoCE member/editor, I know we have a page dedicated to copy-editing requests, but I do not know if you have a page like that. While copyediting, I frequently add Wikilinks and do other Wikify tasks.--DThomsen8 (talk) 16:05, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd say also ask at the main project page (it's been done there before). And BTW, you forgot to sign benzband (talk) 16:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Will work on it a bit... Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 16:10, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I learned something from your update of the External links entry. This article was proposed for deletion, but now I suspect that the improvements made by you and others have made it into a class=start article with reliable sources and established notability with the awards. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh yes, I would certainly put this at least at start class, with no issues on notability. Glad I was able to help :) Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 18:22, 25 February 2012 (UTC)