Welcome to ornacle.com on July 5 2009.
This is an internet experiment running to monitor browsing habbits of individuals through wikipedia contents.

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Military history
WikiProject
Main project page + talk
News
Showcase
Style guide
Announcements and open tasks
 → Articles needing attention
 → Popular articles
 → New articles talk
 → Nominations for deletion talk
The Academy talk
Task forces
edit · changes
Shortcut:
WT:MHCOORD

Contents

[edit] Handbook

Please see the Academy course for coordinators for general information and advice.

[edit] Functions

These tasks should be done as often as needed—ideally, on a daily basis.
Task forces
  • Deal with questions and inquiries.
  • Keep the task force coordinator lists up to date.
  • Set up archive pages and regularly archive out-of-date talk page messages.
  • Copy across appropriate review alert messages from the main talk page to the task force talk page.
  • Copy across other relevant messages from the main talk page to the task force talk page.
  • Remove created articles from "Articles requested" lists.
  • Regularly review "To do" lists and consider task forces initiatives to complete them.
  • Develop article creation initiatives.
  • Build membership by inviting potential new members to participate.
Assessment
  • Monitor the daily assessment log. The main things to look for:
    • Articles being removed. This is usually legitimate (due to merges or non-military articles getting untagged), but is sometimes due to vandalism or broken template code.
    • Articles being moved to "GA-Class" and higher quality. These ratings need to correspond to the article's status in the GA and FA lists or the A-Class project review.
  • Deal with any new assessment requests and the backlog of unassessed articles.
Peer review
A-Class review
Featured content
Member affairs
Other

[edit] Task force allocation

[edit] How to...

[edit] Boilerplate and templates

[edit] Discussion


Archives
  1. August 2006–February 2007
  2. February–April 2007
  3. April–July 2007
  4. July–October 2007
  5. September–November 2007
  6. November–December 2007
  7. January–March 2008
  8. March–April 2008
  9. April 2008
  10. April–May 2008
  11. May-June 2008
  12. June-August 2008
  13. August–September 2008
  14. September–October 2008
  15. October–November 2008
  16. November 2008
  17. December 2008–January 2009
  18. January–February 2009
  19. February–March 2009
  20. March–April 2009
  21. April–June 2009

[edit] Academy writing contest

  • Note: due to school, this is likely to be my last post until Thursday or Friday of this week.

I suggested this to Roger, and he liked it so I am now suggesting here for everyone else to consider. I'd like to propose that we start a drive within the project to expand our academy so that we can add a link to the academy in the project's welcome template. My proposal is to create a writing contest which will run from now until the next coordinator election, during which anyone who writes an article for the academy receives a barnstar, with a bronze, silver, and gold wiki going to the three editors who add the greatest number of useful articles to the academy in the time period. With a little luck, by new years, we can have a full functional online academy for the n00bs and that should help free up some time for us coordinators and the veteran users by allowing us to link to the relevant material rather than have to explain from scratch the answer and why the answer is answered thus.

To run this I propose we create a contest section on the Academy talk page, and invite those participating to list themselves there along with the articles they have created for the drive. We can then check the added material and polish it as necessary to ensure that it is accurate and explained simply enough for our newer editors or editors unfamiliar with the territory to grasp. The goal to generate enough credible material to the academy to add a link to the academy in the project welcome template by the end of the year, if not sooner.

If you are in agreement then we can send this out in the Bugle's June edition. I created the following for publication in the "From the coordinators" section:

Back in February we introduced a new feature to our project: The Academy. Designed to be an online school for our new members and for those who may be unclear on policy or procedure as it relates to our project, the academy has the potential to assist our new members by offering self-instructional courses on all aspects of project operations. Unfortunately, though, only a few editors to the project have penned the material we need to get the academy up and running in full capacity, consequently the academy in its present state is of little use to anyone. As a result, the coordinators are initiating a contest - beginning July 1st and lasting until the end of the October coordinator elections - that aims to bring the academy up to fully operational status. During the contest period we will offer barnstars for anyone who pens an essay for the academy on a area not yet covered. If you would like to participate, add you name to the academy talk page and any articles you created under your name, and state your preference for receiving your awards at the end of the contest or as you reach each milestone. Coordinators for the project will track the academy content as it is added, polish it as needed, and answer any questions on the contest on the academy talk page.

WikiChevrons for 1 article

Helping Hand Barnstar for 2 articles

Guidance Barnstar for 3-4 articles

Tireless contributor for 5 articles

Working man for 6-7 articles

Special Barnstar for 8-9 articles

Writers Barnstar for 10 articles

Motivation Barnstar for 11-15 articles

All Around Amazing Barnstar for 15+ articles

Third place overall

Second place overall

First place overall

Please feel free to polish and trim it as you see fit. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I like this idea -I've been trying to expand and organise the reviewing/assessment section, but there's much work still to do and my time has been very limited recently. I hope this helps to up the rate of progress! Nice work Tom ;) EyeSerenetalk 07:59, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I also like this idea, although I probably won't be able to help with the effort due to limited on-wiki time. —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 03:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Question about "late" contest entries

I've been working on scoring the June contest entries and had a question about some entries added by a user at 00:39 (UTC) on 1 July, and am not sure how to proceed. The main reason for asking is that the inclusion (or not) of the entries has the potential to change the winner this month.

A related (but not identical) situation was discussed here (same user, incidentally), but offers no guidance. As far as this case: on the one hand, the work for the articles was done during the month of June, and they were almost listed on time. But on the other hand, that's not necessarily fair to those who have planned ahead for their contest entries. For now, I have scored only the entries listed in June and await consensus on the "late" ones. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

As one who, like Bellhalla, has not entered the June contest, I should be able to speak with impartiality here...! I know these entries aren't very late but I tend to go for the "rules are rules" argument - when do you make the cutoff for work done during one month but not entered until some time into the following month? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I concur in this case (since it affects the contest's outcome). If they were submitted in July, even if only just, they shouldn't be counted with the June entries; I think doing so would leave the editor who would otherwise have won with a valid grievance. EyeSerenetalk 14:00, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
You both had the first reaction I had: that the entries were too late. Assuming further discussion doesn't sway the consensus to the other viewpoint, the contest results can be considered final, then. — Bellhalla (talk) 21:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I would have to agree; the entries were submitted in July. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:59, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately for Ed!, there's a reason why it's the June contest. I do feel bad for him though... —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 03:06, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Our input is needed to resolve a debate

A cruft incident has taken shape on the SR-71 Blackbird article that has resulted in the creation of the article List of fictional appearances of SR-71 Blackbird. I attempted a prod earlier, and the reply I got was that this was the agreed upon course of action for the pop culture material on the page as per a talk page discussion.

Our MoS explicitly states that cruft is to be avoided. IF it has to exist then it should exist in the article, IMO. We had an article on list of fictional aircraft carrier appearances that got whacked, I'm of the mind that the SR-71 pop culture article should meet a similar fate and the article be protect to some extent to prohibit people from adding pop culture material to the article, or if the pop culture section is actually needed in the article, then to regulate the material through the use of hidden messages and the inclusion of inline citations to reliable sources. Thoughts? TomStar81 (Talk) 02:20, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Frankly, I'm not convinced that it's a problem (for us) if people want to go off and create such lists. As long as the fictional material isn't harming the core articles themselves, I'd be satisfied with letting the normal inclusion/deletion debates deal with the spinoff ones. If the editorial community as a whole is willing to allow such things to exist, so be it; the material is better off isolated than bloating the articles themselves, in my view. Kirill [talk] [pf] 02:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Haha, Ace Combat is listed there. Good game, although the SR-71 played only a (very) small role in AC5 (can't remember when it was in AC0). Anyway, on to the debate. I rather agree with Krill above; I'd much rather have a separate article like that than a pop-culture section in the main article. —Ed (Talk • Contribs) 03:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I agree that it's not a problem for us, but the article should be nominated for deletion per WP:IINFO, WP:CFORK (sort of: it's a bad idea to create a deeply unsatisfactory article as a means of getting unsatisfactory material out of another article) and the essay WP:HTRIVIA. There are any number of precedents for articles similar to this being deleted via AfD. Nick-D (talk) 10:23, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Review recognition April to June

Bryce has very kindly done the hard graft on the review statistics from the period 1 April to 30 Jun. I've tweaked it around as follows and suggest the following awards:

Chevrons
  1. Joe N (38)
  2. The ed17 (38)
  3. YellowMonkey (24)
  4. Cla68 (22)
  5. Jim Sweeney (22)
  6. AustralianRupert (21)
  7. Nick-D (19)
  8. TomStar81 (19)
  9. Abraham, B.S. (15)
  10. Ian Rose (12)
Content Review Medal
  1. Patar knight (9)
  2. Piotrus (7)
  3. Patton123 (6)
  4. Sturmvogel 66 (6)
  5. Bellhalla (5)
  6. Skinny87 (5)
  7. Ed! (4)
  8. Magicpiano (4)
  9. Maralia (4)
  10. Wandalstouring (4)
  11. Cool3 (3)
  12. Hawkeye7 (3)
  13. IceUnshattered (3)
  14. Jackyd101 (3)
  15. MBK004 (3)
  16. Simon Harley (3)
  17. Vantine84 (3)
Two Stripes
  1. EnigmaMcmxc (1)
  2. Kyriakos (1)
  3. Saberwyn (2)
One Stripe
  1. Brad101 (2)
  2. Dhatfield (2)
  3. Kirill Lokshin (2)
  4. Kirk (2)
  5. Mm40 (2)
  6. Admiral Norton (1)
  7. Askari Mark (1)
  8. Benea (1)
  9. Binksternet (1)
  10. Brianboulton (1)
  11. Btphelps (1)
  12. Cam (1)
  13. Cuprum17 (1)
  14. Geoff Plourde (1)
  15. Guyinblack25 (1)
  16. Hartfelt (1)
  17. HLGallon (1)
  18. Juliancolton (1)
  19. La Pianista (1)
  20. Nosedown (1)
  21. Ost316 (1)
  22. Parsecboy (1)
  23. Redtigerxyz (1)
  24. Rosiestep (1)
  25. Ruhrfisch (1)
  26. Socrates2008 (1)
  27. Sumanch (1)
  28. TechOutsider (1)
  29. Xatsmann (1)

If there's no opposition to this, I'll awards the medals tomorrow and include them in the current issue of "The Bugle".  Roger Davies talk 09:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

That all looks good to me - thanks Bryce! The number of editors who qualified for the awards is also very impressive, especially when you consider how unusually quiet things were for much of May and June Nick-D (talk) 09:47, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Looks good to me as well. Thanks! TomStar81 (Talk) 21:48, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
I may be missing something obvious but what's the rationale for 1 stripe vs. 2 stripes? We have people with 1 review and people with 2 reviews mixed in both - I would've thought 1 review earns 1 stripe, 2 reviews earn 2 stripes, and 3 to 9 (or 3 to 11, could be either with this lot) earns the Content Review Medal... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:46, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
People get two-stripes if they got a one-stripe last time, irrespective of number of edits. It makes it a kind of ongoing progression and hopefully encourages them to keep at it for a three-stripe.  Roger Davies talk 03:37, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Now it makes sense...! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:12, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
All looks and sounds good to me. You said it, Nick; it is great to see that the number of reviews is still rather high, despite this being a more inactive period. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 06:01, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Coordinators for the cold war task force

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Cold War task force has not officially been assigned any coordinators. I think we ought to assign coordinators for this TF sooner rather than later. I'd be willing to list myself as a coordinator for the TF, but we still need one or two more coordinators to volunteer for the task force. TomStar81 (Talk) 21:48, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Add me to that list willing. -MBK004 22:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Me too... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, that was easy. The three of us it is then, at least until October. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:26, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Contest Dept (for June)

I see that Bellhalla has done the asssessments already (for which, many thanks!). Does anyone have time in the next few hours to tally up the figures for the Awards and Honours section of the June issue of "The Bugle" and award the gongs please? I've got a few other things to sort out for this issue and I'm running out of time today. If no one can spare the time immediately, I'll do it myself but perhaps not until tomorrow morning.  Roger Davies talk 10:38, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history/Coordinators"
Personal tools
Visit joltnews for the latest headlines
Visit bloit.com for company information
Geed Media does computer consulting on long island.
This page viewed times. See Logs