![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
There was a disagreement at Talk:NPA personality theory about how to rate the article's quality and importance for Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychology. The quality issue was cleared up pretty quickly, but there was quite a discussion about what exactly "importance" is supposed to mean in this context, and some additional discussion took place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychology/Assessment. I know that the WikiProjects are not required to use the same assessment scale as the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, but I think we want it to be as consistent as possible. I wanted to ask this group, what exactly are you looking at when you assess an article's importance? How do you intend to use this assessment in your project? I appreciate any feedback you can give us to clear this up! — Cswrye 19:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
The following postings were copied by User:Walkerma from the main 1.0 talk page
Can anyone advise on how the non-article class parameters are supposed to work for the purposes of these combined WikiProject/assesment banners being placed on non-article talk pages? I have seen these banners placed on talk pages for relevant categories and template using class=NA, class=template, class=category, and so on. But the approach doesn't seem completely consistent.
An example is Category:Template-Class_film_articles where the Film WikiProject has grouped templates that have been "rated" template-class. This imprecise wording is avoided if the "NA wording" is used to say that the template is a template and doesn't need rating. Some template have been set up to do this, but I can't find any examples at the moment. Can anyone remind me where they are, or how to tweak the wording?
Going back to the film non-article parameters. The blurb on Category:Film_articles_by_quality shows that the system has been extended to include other classes such as List, Category and Disambig (I haven't found anyone yet using a "redirect" class to organise redirects, though see Category:Middle-earth redirects). I assume, that like the NA classification, these "non-article" classifications don't appear in the film quality statistics page and other stats pages, which I believe are maintained by a bot. I can understand why it doesn't include them directly, but what is the best way to generate statistics based on these non-article parameters such as NA, category, and template?
An alternative approach is seen at WikiProject Middle-earth, where Template:ME-project is used on article talk pages, Template:ME-category is used on category talk pages, and Template:ME-template is used on template pages.
Is there any reason to prefer putting all the parameters inside one template (as in the Film WikiProject), or to use separate banners (the Middle-earth WikiProject)? I prefer the latter approach, but was wondering if the assessment statistcs approach could be adapted to include stats on the number of templates, categories and other non-article pages? Carcharoth 11:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
End of copied comments
{{#switch:{{{class}}} |FA |A |B |Start |Stub= This article has been rated as {{{class}}}-Class. |Dab= This article is a disambiguation page, and does not require a rating. |Cat= This page is a category, and does not require a rating ... }}
India project and Trains banner templates have the following class values.
If you need more information, check out the banner templates. Regards, Ganeshk ( talk) 06:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Those classifications have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on Wikipedia 1.0 assessments (which this page is about). Mathbot doesn't read them and it really doesn't matter how they're formatted. That's why there's no standard scheme. I agree with Kirill about class=List and said pretty much the same when somebody mentioned that my plugin doesn't support it: a list is an article, it can be featured, it should be assessed. -- kingboyk 11:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Thread moved from Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Work via Wikiprojects
Hi,
There's a problem with one of the comments at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Ethnic groups articles by quality. The article in question is "Obotrites," but it has weirdness in the comment section... help would be appreciated!-- Ling.Nut 15:50, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
PS - it may have something to do with the fact that the comment page for "Rukai people", which probably appeared in that particular slot previuosly, was deleted. -- Ling.Nut 16:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I would like to make two template suggestions:
-- evrik 20:03, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I found a silly example of this at List of fictional battles (I know, I know...). Given that the list can be expanded almost indefinitely, does each fictional universe WikiProject get to assess the list? But I am sure that better examples of overview articles can be found. Such as Human or Earth - several WikiProjects have probably fought pitched battles over those articles already! :-) I tend towards the share-and-share-alike mentality, but then I found someone had put a WP-Film template on Tom Bombadil, and I went livid! :-) But I do have issues with articles where there are bits about adaptations in films, eg. many of the LotR character articles have a bit about the film adaptation, so Gandalf has a "film-project" tag because there is a small section about Adaptations. For LotR, there are separate film articles, so that is not so much of a problem. But where overlap is so unbalanced, at what point can another WikiProject get a foot in the door, so to speak? Carcharoth 05:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
...has no assessed articles shown, 327 unassessed, but a total below the importance ratings of 1339. Category:Stub-class Germany articles, for example, contains hundreds of articles and is properly situated in Category:Germany articles by quality which is a subcat of Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments. Any idea what's going on? -- kingboyk 13:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
The index currently shows 150 projects are participating in the bot process. Should this go to Signpost? -- Ganeshk ( talk) 18:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I can't figure out why articles aren't showing up in Category:Dallas articles with comments. An example of a page that should is Talk:Oak Lawn, Dallas per Talk:Oak Lawn, Dallas/Comments and coding from {{ WikiProject Dallas}}. Any help/advice would be great!! drumguy8800 C T 19:30, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't know why but it looks like a few entries are mixed up for WP:HV. Please let us know if there is a bug in our code and if there's any good way to avoid this. The relevant entries are: Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Heraldry and vexillology articles by quality/1 (articles 2 and 3), and Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Heraldry and vexillology articles by quality/2 (articles 387 and 388) and Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Heraldry and vexillology articles by quality/4 (articles 37 and 38 and 391 and 392). Regards. Valentinian (talk) / (contribs) 09:27, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
{{assessment | page=[[Elias Ashmole]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Elias_Ashmole&oldid=75298981 ] | importance= | date=[[October 6]], [[2006]] | class={{FA-Class}} | version=0.5 | comments={{Talk:Elias Ashmole/Comments }}
I was wondering if the bot ought to ignore WikiProjects which have 0 articles? ( Index · Statistics · Log)
Also, since you collect the stats for every project on every run, it might be cool to add columns to the table on this page for total of number articles (per project) and number unassessed? -- kingboyk 15:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Today the bot was editing just fine for a while, until here, then it started mass-blanking the articles. That is something I can't explain, either there is an error in the script, then it should be all wrong, or there should be no error, then all the pages should be right. I really must go to bed now, so I just killed the bot and will look into this tomorrow. Sorry, I don't know what is going on. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 06:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
As if one can sleep. :) I found the problem; the html source code for categories changed suddenly in a very subtle way, but enough to confuse the bot. I fixed it now. Here are some issues to think about.
PS I will not run the bot until something is done about item 1 above. Restarting the bot would of course regenrate all pages, but it will lose the history link information (see for example the first column here for what I mean). Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 06:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
What'll happen when there're so many projects and updates to do that it takes the bot more than 24 hours to do a run? Then we won't have daily runs anymore. Rlevse 13:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
(Deindent and reply to Titoxd above.) Then perhaps we can wait until they change the syntax, as we don't want the bot to again mass blank everything because it is confused by the change. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 19:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I am not able to connect to my UCLA machine today, the network is down. I guess that explains why mathbot stopped running in the middle of the night. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 16:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
While looking through Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Tropical cyclone articles by quality/1, I saw that the "edit comment" links are malformed. Am I the only one who saw that? Tito xd( ?!?) 05:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Is it possible for Mathbot to create a table showing the correlation of class and importance? For example:
Table Name Goes Here? |
Importance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | ||
Class | FA | # | # | # | # |
A | # | # | # | # | |
GA | # | # | # | # | |
B | # | # | # | # | |
Start | # | # | # | # | |
Stub | # | # | # | # |
My thoughts are that it isn't really feasibly possible with the way Mathbot works. I assume it simply loads the categories instead of loading each page and implementing this would seriously convolute the code, require an entire rewrite and would cause massive load. But I figured I'd just ask anyway, in case I'm completely wrong. :) thadius856 talk 01:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Table Name Goes Here? |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | Total | ||
Class | FA | # | # | # | # | # | # |
A | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
GA | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
B | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Start | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Stub | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
NA | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Total | # | # | # | # | # | # |
On a side note, I figured I'd update it with some color, just for the sake of it. ;) thadius856 talk 05:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
x | Top | High | Mid | Low |
---|---|---|---|---|
FA | # | # | # | # |
A | # | # | # | # |
GA | # | # | # | # |
B | # | # | # | # |
Start | # | # | # | # |
Stub | # | # | # | # |
It seems that this idea has good support so I will modify the code which generates the statistics table to include the extra columns as above with quality vs importance.
That is going to make the stats tables wider than now (see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/A-League player articles by quality statistics for current layout), but I hope that won't be a problem. I will work on this the coming weekend. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 16:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Table Name Goes Here? |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | Total | ||
Class | FA | # | # | # | # | # | # |
A | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
GA | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
B | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Start | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Stub | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
NA | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Total | # | # | # | # | # | # |
Is that the combined idea then the information and the colour. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/ (Desk) 16:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Assessment Statistics |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | ??? | Total | ||
Class | FA | # | # | # | # | # | # |
A | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
GA | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
B | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Start | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Stub | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
??? | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Total | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Non-article pages | # |
Obviously a project should concentrate on having their highest importance articles improved to the highest classes (rising numbers in top-left corner and decreasing numbers in bottom-right corner), and this is what I was hoping such a format would promote when I first proposed it. If you look at WP:AIRPORTS/A, for example, you'll notice that our one FA and two GA articles are not necessarily the most important airports in the world by most definitions. thadius856 talk 23:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Update - trial Category Intersection system is at http://aerik.com/wikintersections.php. Please don't overload it! :-) See Wikipedia talk:Category intersection for details of the person who set that up. Carcharoth 16:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Following a comment by Mike Peel on my talk page, I modified the date stamp at the bottom of lists to GMT from my local time (PST). Today that will cause the bot to jump a day, see here, but from tomorrow on, the datestamp output by the bot will actually correspond to the current day to most users at most times. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 03:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Oleg, Just like the class categories link to the related project's respective class categories, could the same be done with the Importance parameter? Right now they show up with no links on the statistics pages. Thanks, Ganeshk ( talk) 23:47, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Just wondering if the update was still scheduled for this weekend. I'm getting rather antsy, but I completely understand if its been delay, or trashed entirely. Thanks! thadius856 talk 18:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
It looks fine to me, but could the old table still also be generated as a smaller alternative? A lot of the projects don't use the importance criteria at all, and furthermore a lot of them try to transclude the stats table in their sidebars. The new wider table pretty much breaks the nice-looking sidebars. Thanks. Girolamo Savonarola 10:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, the new stats layout is good. But it creates problems for some WikiProjects.
A lot of the projects use {{PROJECT articles by quality statistics}} to blend the stats into the project page. Now this new, wider table is destroying the layout. AQu01rius ( User • Talk) 16:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
This doesn't look good. 325px is too wide, and eats a lot space (which ruins the purpose of sidebar). I'll try to figure out other ways around.. AQu01rius ( User • Talk) 21:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
The new detailed stats is really not suitable for inline inclusion anymore, and what I'll do is to remove it, and just leave the "view full worklist" link in the sidebar. AQu01rius ( User • Talk) 19:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
{{ WikiProject Canada}} not working with the Mathbot assessment project. Lincher 19:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
I am very tempted to switch to Yurik's API (mentioned a few sections above) for reading categories, not only because it would be faster and less confusing to my bot, but also because the way things are now, parsing HTML, sometimes results in cached (and therefore inaccurate) information. Yurik's API provides minimally formatted output delivered straight from the database, which is as good as it gets.
An example of getting the articles and subcategories in Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments is here. That text does not include all subcategories however (there is a limit on the number of subcategories displayed at once, for performance reasons I guess). What I was not able to figure out is what query to use to get the remainder of the category. Any ideas on that? Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 16:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
[query] => Array ( [category] => Array ( [next] => Maharashtra articles by quality )
)
the next argument gives the starting point for the next query. You can do a loop, or recursion, testing to see if query section of the output is present. -- Salix alba ( talk) 17:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
With Salix alba's help I switched to Yurik's API for reading categories (and will do that for history revisions soon also, that will make the code faster). Let us hope that Yurik won't change the API syntax, that would confuse the bot. The new API has the advantage that it always gets up-to-date info, rather than stale html the way it was before. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 05:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I implemented a web form that allows one to run the bot for an individual project at any time, rather than waiting a good chunk of a day until it is scheduled. I think that could be helpful for new projects as then one could get a quick feedback if the project was set up right. The link is here. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 05:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I posted the source code to the Perl script which updates the lists in the index together with all dependencies and instructions here.
I think it would be a good idea if perhaps somebody could try it out. I am not going anywhere any time soon, but thinking long term, considering how important the Wikipedia 1.0 project is and the amount of work put into this project by the community so far, I think it would good if the code is public and more people than just me could run it and perhaps even have an idea of how to modify it. Following the instructions over there should take an hour at most, assuming that nothing goes wrong. So, any volunteers? :) Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 05:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I was just looking through the lists of all articles per WikiProject (xXx articles by quality/#). I'm just wondering why the dates were all wikilinked. It seems to me it doesn't really serve any purpose and WP:MOSDATE seems to hint that dates shouldn't be linked unless they give context, but I get the feeling that's only for ns0.
However, removing the wikilinks seems that it wouldn't trim much of the size of the file off. I was just wondering if perhaps switching to a [[YYYY-MM-DD]] format would keep file sizes down any. It wouldn't change anything on the user's end, since user preferences catch that format as well. thadius856 talk| airports| neutrality 06:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Should we get excited about this commit to SVN? Apparently, we are now able to create sortable tables... Tito xd( ?!?) 00:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
When adding a new project, one should generate those FA-Class, A-Class, Top-importance and other categories. I made that step (semi-)automatic. One can visit Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Generate categories and specify what categories to create, and the bot will do it for you. Only administrators can use that tool (it requires editing a protected page). That way random people can't just generate any categories they want, and if the categories were generated incorrectly the admin in question can delete them.
One can argue this tool is not that necessary, but I think it can save some work when setting up a project (and for people who did not set up a new project for the bot before there is less to learn this way). Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 06:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Am I missing something, or have almost 3000 articles just gone missing? See: [4]- Trevor MacInnis ( Contribs) 04:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
I looked at the stats of around 65 of the projects at the end of the list, and also at all biography projects (arts and entertainment, core, military, and other biographical). None had any significant decreases in the numbers, except the fat mother-of-all plain biography articles by quality. That one is always ran last, as it is the hugest.
If it is a bot bug, it could be subtle, as it shows up very seldom (once, so far). Can't be that the server was down; the bot was programmed to die if it can't repeatedly do an HTTP request. If it can't read the contents of a category, it would also die.
The bot did not crash, otherwise it would not have commited the total stats on that date. By the way, if you look at that diff, you would see that only the B-Class articles and Unassessed articles decreased, and roughly by same amount as in the problematic Biography stats.
All in all, I don't know what is going on. Maybe the code is sound but we are pushing against the limits of Perl, or computer memory, or who knows what. Either way it appears that the only place article disappeared from is the biography project (such a monster should not exist to start with). I won't let the bot run today either. But if we discover nothing by tomorrow I guess we could run it again and hope for the best.
This keeps me again wondering. What if one day for a reason or another the bot will get really mad? Would be rather hard to reverse the damage. Any comments? Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 03:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I am almost finished with the "backup on disk feature", I think I will complete it tomorrow.
I reverted by hand the first 25 pages of Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biography articles by quality, containing all FA-Class, A-Class, GA-Class, B-Class and a bunch of Start-Class articles (note by the way the corrupted text at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biography articles by quality/6 ( specific version link), I don't understand what is going on).
I tested the bot just in case on the Adelaide project, and nothing strange happens.
So, with the evidence so far that the problem is most likely not with the bot but with the Biography project, I restarted the bot for today. Hopefully nothing wrong will happen. Once the backup feature is finished, even if something wrong happens it will be easier to revert (not that I should become more sloppy as a coder :)
Good night, all. :) Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 05:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
May just be that it has stopped again - this time at about 7:30 at the end of "Albums" :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/ (Desk) 10:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
The film stats didn't update last night so I tried to run the bot on demand. It worked unti it got here:
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=Unassessed+importance+film+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=List+of+films+made+into+television+programs
It just stopped. Do you know what the problem is? Cbrown1023 17:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Biography's in trouble again. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 20:58, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I will keep that in mind. But there's got to be more to it. Per the log, the bot started reading the B-Class biography articles, read the articles starting with A, then B, then C, all the way to J, and then simply did not go on. Here's the relevant part in the log
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=Andy+Warhol
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=Bo+Schembechler
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=Constantine+Maroulis
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=El+Greco
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=Gessius+Florus
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=Isabella%2c+Countess+of+Atholl
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=John+H.+Russell%2c+Jr.
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=Start-Class+biography+articles&format=txt
(look at the last too lines, it just went from B-Class to Start-Class). Even if the B-Class category was jumbled, it should have still yielded some articles beyond J. When I ran the bot manually this afternoon, it easily went beyond J. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 01:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I was doing some testing for the bot and found articles disappearing, see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Pokémon Collaborative Project articles by quality/1 history. That is very strange. I am taking the bot down for today, hopefully one of these days I'll find out what is going on. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 02:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
So, the bot has not been working well recetnly, and I think this started with me switching to Yurik's query format for reading categories. I decided to go back to the old way of reading categories, parsing html source. That also has problems, like sometimes the wiki servers change the format of html (and the bot is confused) and sometimes they serve cached info, but let us see if the switch back will deal with the problems with the biography articles.
I implemented a couple of routines which will hopefully make the bot automatically recover if articles go missing.
The way things are now, if say a bot did not read well a category (be it either its fault or server's fault), some articles will disappear from the worklists. Next time the bot runs it may read that category well and recover an article in the list. What would be lost however, would be the history link and the date (column 1 and 3 here for example).
In addition to doing the backup mentioned somewhere in the previous sections, I now store on disk the history links and dates for the last five days (all in one single file for each project). So, if an article goes missing, and pops up back in a day or two, the bot will check on disk if that article has been around recently. If yes, and if the quality assessment did not change, the bot will recover the old history link and date from disk, so that info won't be lost.
In short, now the bot not only writes backups, it also reads backups, and vital info is not stored only within the Wikipedia worklists but also on disk. Here's a demonstration: I removed a few articles, and the bot put them back without information loss.
I will let the bot run today. Let's see what happens. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 04:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
When loading the Album articles and identifying the different versions, when the bot doesn't find a version then there is an automatic error as in Noxious Saucy Beast and Here We Are (Swizzle Tree) where they have been fixed ... I have removed the tag for there is no article attached to the talk page. I think this might be the what causes the problem. Lincher 07:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
What's up with the bot. There hasn't been a full run in 3 days. Rlevse 23:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
... because of a power outage at my work. The power is still out, perhaps it will come back later tonight. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 01:29, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Until now, when an article got renamed, the bot would consider that the old article disappeared and a new article got created. Now I modified the script to actually copy over the history link and date to the new article. I don't know how necessary that is, but I would think it makes more sense that way. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 05:18, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Quite a lot of the articles in the list are redlinks, but their talk pages list the article as B-Class, etc. I wrote a script to tag such talk pages for speedy deletion. They will also show up in Category:Wikipedia 1.0 problematic articles for people to take a closer look. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 06:12, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Category:Wikipedia Version 0.5 is very huge I think. Is perhaps time to split it according to individual projects, say Category:Military history version 0.5 articles? That would require modifying the assessment templates for all the projects (e.g., {{ WPMILHIST}}), but I'd think that at some point this may need to be done. Comments? Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 20:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
(Moved "BozMo's first cut to Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#BozMo's first cut)
WikiProject Louisville has recently started seriously doing assessment work. I was wondering if templates and categories covered by our project could also be hit by the bot for the sake of statistics/logs. It would be very helpful. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 17:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Something is strange here. Look at the Scouting project tag here: Talk:Stanisław Broniewski, the ratings display correctly, note the talk page show no change in Dec. Then look here under Dec 24, [7], the importance was removed and then here at the bottom the importance doesn't show up: [8]. Why did this happen, the rating did not change but the bot processed it as if it were? Thanks. Rlevse 10:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
There was a disagreement at Talk:NPA personality theory about how to rate the article's quality and importance for Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychology. The quality issue was cleared up pretty quickly, but there was quite a discussion about what exactly "importance" is supposed to mean in this context, and some additional discussion took place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychology/Assessment. I know that the WikiProjects are not required to use the same assessment scale as the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, but I think we want it to be as consistent as possible. I wanted to ask this group, what exactly are you looking at when you assess an article's importance? How do you intend to use this assessment in your project? I appreciate any feedback you can give us to clear this up! — Cswrye 19:14, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
The following postings were copied by User:Walkerma from the main 1.0 talk page
Can anyone advise on how the non-article class parameters are supposed to work for the purposes of these combined WikiProject/assesment banners being placed on non-article talk pages? I have seen these banners placed on talk pages for relevant categories and template using class=NA, class=template, class=category, and so on. But the approach doesn't seem completely consistent.
An example is Category:Template-Class_film_articles where the Film WikiProject has grouped templates that have been "rated" template-class. This imprecise wording is avoided if the "NA wording" is used to say that the template is a template and doesn't need rating. Some template have been set up to do this, but I can't find any examples at the moment. Can anyone remind me where they are, or how to tweak the wording?
Going back to the film non-article parameters. The blurb on Category:Film_articles_by_quality shows that the system has been extended to include other classes such as List, Category and Disambig (I haven't found anyone yet using a "redirect" class to organise redirects, though see Category:Middle-earth redirects). I assume, that like the NA classification, these "non-article" classifications don't appear in the film quality statistics page and other stats pages, which I believe are maintained by a bot. I can understand why it doesn't include them directly, but what is the best way to generate statistics based on these non-article parameters such as NA, category, and template?
An alternative approach is seen at WikiProject Middle-earth, where Template:ME-project is used on article talk pages, Template:ME-category is used on category talk pages, and Template:ME-template is used on template pages.
Is there any reason to prefer putting all the parameters inside one template (as in the Film WikiProject), or to use separate banners (the Middle-earth WikiProject)? I prefer the latter approach, but was wondering if the assessment statistcs approach could be adapted to include stats on the number of templates, categories and other non-article pages? Carcharoth 11:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
End of copied comments
{{#switch:{{{class}}} |FA |A |B |Start |Stub= This article has been rated as {{{class}}}-Class. |Dab= This article is a disambiguation page, and does not require a rating. |Cat= This page is a category, and does not require a rating ... }}
India project and Trains banner templates have the following class values.
If you need more information, check out the banner templates. Regards, Ganeshk ( talk) 06:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Those classifications have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on Wikipedia 1.0 assessments (which this page is about). Mathbot doesn't read them and it really doesn't matter how they're formatted. That's why there's no standard scheme. I agree with Kirill about class=List and said pretty much the same when somebody mentioned that my plugin doesn't support it: a list is an article, it can be featured, it should be assessed. -- kingboyk 11:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Thread moved from Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Work via Wikiprojects
Hi,
There's a problem with one of the comments at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Ethnic groups articles by quality. The article in question is "Obotrites," but it has weirdness in the comment section... help would be appreciated!-- Ling.Nut 15:50, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
PS - it may have something to do with the fact that the comment page for "Rukai people", which probably appeared in that particular slot previuosly, was deleted. -- Ling.Nut 16:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I would like to make two template suggestions:
-- evrik 20:03, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I found a silly example of this at List of fictional battles (I know, I know...). Given that the list can be expanded almost indefinitely, does each fictional universe WikiProject get to assess the list? But I am sure that better examples of overview articles can be found. Such as Human or Earth - several WikiProjects have probably fought pitched battles over those articles already! :-) I tend towards the share-and-share-alike mentality, but then I found someone had put a WP-Film template on Tom Bombadil, and I went livid! :-) But I do have issues with articles where there are bits about adaptations in films, eg. many of the LotR character articles have a bit about the film adaptation, so Gandalf has a "film-project" tag because there is a small section about Adaptations. For LotR, there are separate film articles, so that is not so much of a problem. But where overlap is so unbalanced, at what point can another WikiProject get a foot in the door, so to speak? Carcharoth 05:45, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
...has no assessed articles shown, 327 unassessed, but a total below the importance ratings of 1339. Category:Stub-class Germany articles, for example, contains hundreds of articles and is properly situated in Category:Germany articles by quality which is a subcat of Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments. Any idea what's going on? -- kingboyk 13:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
The index currently shows 150 projects are participating in the bot process. Should this go to Signpost? -- Ganeshk ( talk) 18:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I can't figure out why articles aren't showing up in Category:Dallas articles with comments. An example of a page that should is Talk:Oak Lawn, Dallas per Talk:Oak Lawn, Dallas/Comments and coding from {{ WikiProject Dallas}}. Any help/advice would be great!! drumguy8800 C T 19:30, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't know why but it looks like a few entries are mixed up for WP:HV. Please let us know if there is a bug in our code and if there's any good way to avoid this. The relevant entries are: Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Heraldry and vexillology articles by quality/1 (articles 2 and 3), and Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Heraldry and vexillology articles by quality/2 (articles 387 and 388) and Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Heraldry and vexillology articles by quality/4 (articles 37 and 38 and 391 and 392). Regards. Valentinian (talk) / (contribs) 09:27, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
{{assessment | page=[[Elias Ashmole]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Elias_Ashmole&oldid=75298981 ] | importance= | date=[[October 6]], [[2006]] | class={{FA-Class}} | version=0.5 | comments={{Talk:Elias Ashmole/Comments }}
I was wondering if the bot ought to ignore WikiProjects which have 0 articles? ( Index · Statistics · Log)
Also, since you collect the stats for every project on every run, it might be cool to add columns to the table on this page for total of number articles (per project) and number unassessed? -- kingboyk 15:39, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Today the bot was editing just fine for a while, until here, then it started mass-blanking the articles. That is something I can't explain, either there is an error in the script, then it should be all wrong, or there should be no error, then all the pages should be right. I really must go to bed now, so I just killed the bot and will look into this tomorrow. Sorry, I don't know what is going on. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 06:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
As if one can sleep. :) I found the problem; the html source code for categories changed suddenly in a very subtle way, but enough to confuse the bot. I fixed it now. Here are some issues to think about.
PS I will not run the bot until something is done about item 1 above. Restarting the bot would of course regenrate all pages, but it will lose the history link information (see for example the first column here for what I mean). Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 06:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
What'll happen when there're so many projects and updates to do that it takes the bot more than 24 hours to do a run? Then we won't have daily runs anymore. Rlevse 13:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
(Deindent and reply to Titoxd above.) Then perhaps we can wait until they change the syntax, as we don't want the bot to again mass blank everything because it is confused by the change. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 19:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
I am not able to connect to my UCLA machine today, the network is down. I guess that explains why mathbot stopped running in the middle of the night. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 16:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
While looking through Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Tropical cyclone articles by quality/1, I saw that the "edit comment" links are malformed. Am I the only one who saw that? Tito xd( ?!?) 05:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Is it possible for Mathbot to create a table showing the correlation of class and importance? For example:
Table Name Goes Here? |
Importance | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | ||
Class | FA | # | # | # | # |
A | # | # | # | # | |
GA | # | # | # | # | |
B | # | # | # | # | |
Start | # | # | # | # | |
Stub | # | # | # | # |
My thoughts are that it isn't really feasibly possible with the way Mathbot works. I assume it simply loads the categories instead of loading each page and implementing this would seriously convolute the code, require an entire rewrite and would cause massive load. But I figured I'd just ask anyway, in case I'm completely wrong. :) thadius856 talk 01:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Table Name Goes Here? |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | Total | ||
Class | FA | # | # | # | # | # | # |
A | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
GA | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
B | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Start | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Stub | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
NA | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Total | # | # | # | # | # | # |
On a side note, I figured I'd update it with some color, just for the sake of it. ;) thadius856 talk 05:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
x | Top | High | Mid | Low |
---|---|---|---|---|
FA | # | # | # | # |
A | # | # | # | # |
GA | # | # | # | # |
B | # | # | # | # |
Start | # | # | # | # |
Stub | # | # | # | # |
It seems that this idea has good support so I will modify the code which generates the statistics table to include the extra columns as above with quality vs importance.
That is going to make the stats tables wider than now (see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/A-League player articles by quality statistics for current layout), but I hope that won't be a problem. I will work on this the coming weekend. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 16:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Table Name Goes Here? |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | NA | Total | ||
Class | FA | # | # | # | # | # | # |
A | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
GA | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
B | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Start | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Stub | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
NA | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Total | # | # | # | # | # | # |
Is that the combined idea then the information and the colour. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/ (Desk) 16:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Assessment Statistics |
Importance | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Top | High | Mid | Low | ??? | Total | ||
Class | FA | # | # | # | # | # | # |
A | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
GA | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
B | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Start | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Stub | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
??? | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Total | # | # | # | # | # | # | |
Non-article pages | # |
Obviously a project should concentrate on having their highest importance articles improved to the highest classes (rising numbers in top-left corner and decreasing numbers in bottom-right corner), and this is what I was hoping such a format would promote when I first proposed it. If you look at WP:AIRPORTS/A, for example, you'll notice that our one FA and two GA articles are not necessarily the most important airports in the world by most definitions. thadius856 talk 23:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Update - trial Category Intersection system is at http://aerik.com/wikintersections.php. Please don't overload it! :-) See Wikipedia talk:Category intersection for details of the person who set that up. Carcharoth 16:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Following a comment by Mike Peel on my talk page, I modified the date stamp at the bottom of lists to GMT from my local time (PST). Today that will cause the bot to jump a day, see here, but from tomorrow on, the datestamp output by the bot will actually correspond to the current day to most users at most times. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 03:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Oleg, Just like the class categories link to the related project's respective class categories, could the same be done with the Importance parameter? Right now they show up with no links on the statistics pages. Thanks, Ganeshk ( talk) 23:47, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Just wondering if the update was still scheduled for this weekend. I'm getting rather antsy, but I completely understand if its been delay, or trashed entirely. Thanks! thadius856 talk 18:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
It looks fine to me, but could the old table still also be generated as a smaller alternative? A lot of the projects don't use the importance criteria at all, and furthermore a lot of them try to transclude the stats table in their sidebars. The new wider table pretty much breaks the nice-looking sidebars. Thanks. Girolamo Savonarola 10:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, the new stats layout is good. But it creates problems for some WikiProjects.
A lot of the projects use {{PROJECT articles by quality statistics}} to blend the stats into the project page. Now this new, wider table is destroying the layout. AQu01rius ( User • Talk) 16:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
This doesn't look good. 325px is too wide, and eats a lot space (which ruins the purpose of sidebar). I'll try to figure out other ways around.. AQu01rius ( User • Talk) 21:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
The new detailed stats is really not suitable for inline inclusion anymore, and what I'll do is to remove it, and just leave the "view full worklist" link in the sidebar. AQu01rius ( User • Talk) 19:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
{{ WikiProject Canada}} not working with the Mathbot assessment project. Lincher 19:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
I am very tempted to switch to Yurik's API (mentioned a few sections above) for reading categories, not only because it would be faster and less confusing to my bot, but also because the way things are now, parsing HTML, sometimes results in cached (and therefore inaccurate) information. Yurik's API provides minimally formatted output delivered straight from the database, which is as good as it gets.
An example of getting the articles and subcategories in Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments is here. That text does not include all subcategories however (there is a limit on the number of subcategories displayed at once, for performance reasons I guess). What I was not able to figure out is what query to use to get the remainder of the category. Any ideas on that? Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 16:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
[query] => Array ( [category] => Array ( [next] => Maharashtra articles by quality )
)
the next argument gives the starting point for the next query. You can do a loop, or recursion, testing to see if query section of the output is present. -- Salix alba ( talk) 17:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
With Salix alba's help I switched to Yurik's API for reading categories (and will do that for history revisions soon also, that will make the code faster). Let us hope that Yurik won't change the API syntax, that would confuse the bot. The new API has the advantage that it always gets up-to-date info, rather than stale html the way it was before. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 05:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I implemented a web form that allows one to run the bot for an individual project at any time, rather than waiting a good chunk of a day until it is scheduled. I think that could be helpful for new projects as then one could get a quick feedback if the project was set up right. The link is here. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 05:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I posted the source code to the Perl script which updates the lists in the index together with all dependencies and instructions here.
I think it would be a good idea if perhaps somebody could try it out. I am not going anywhere any time soon, but thinking long term, considering how important the Wikipedia 1.0 project is and the amount of work put into this project by the community so far, I think it would good if the code is public and more people than just me could run it and perhaps even have an idea of how to modify it. Following the instructions over there should take an hour at most, assuming that nothing goes wrong. So, any volunteers? :) Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 05:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I was just looking through the lists of all articles per WikiProject (xXx articles by quality/#). I'm just wondering why the dates were all wikilinked. It seems to me it doesn't really serve any purpose and WP:MOSDATE seems to hint that dates shouldn't be linked unless they give context, but I get the feeling that's only for ns0.
However, removing the wikilinks seems that it wouldn't trim much of the size of the file off. I was just wondering if perhaps switching to a [[YYYY-MM-DD]] format would keep file sizes down any. It wouldn't change anything on the user's end, since user preferences catch that format as well. thadius856 talk| airports| neutrality 06:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Should we get excited about this commit to SVN? Apparently, we are now able to create sortable tables... Tito xd( ?!?) 00:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
When adding a new project, one should generate those FA-Class, A-Class, Top-importance and other categories. I made that step (semi-)automatic. One can visit Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Generate categories and specify what categories to create, and the bot will do it for you. Only administrators can use that tool (it requires editing a protected page). That way random people can't just generate any categories they want, and if the categories were generated incorrectly the admin in question can delete them.
One can argue this tool is not that necessary, but I think it can save some work when setting up a project (and for people who did not set up a new project for the bot before there is less to learn this way). Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 06:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Am I missing something, or have almost 3000 articles just gone missing? See: [4]- Trevor MacInnis ( Contribs) 04:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
I looked at the stats of around 65 of the projects at the end of the list, and also at all biography projects (arts and entertainment, core, military, and other biographical). None had any significant decreases in the numbers, except the fat mother-of-all plain biography articles by quality. That one is always ran last, as it is the hugest.
If it is a bot bug, it could be subtle, as it shows up very seldom (once, so far). Can't be that the server was down; the bot was programmed to die if it can't repeatedly do an HTTP request. If it can't read the contents of a category, it would also die.
The bot did not crash, otherwise it would not have commited the total stats on that date. By the way, if you look at that diff, you would see that only the B-Class articles and Unassessed articles decreased, and roughly by same amount as in the problematic Biography stats.
All in all, I don't know what is going on. Maybe the code is sound but we are pushing against the limits of Perl, or computer memory, or who knows what. Either way it appears that the only place article disappeared from is the biography project (such a monster should not exist to start with). I won't let the bot run today either. But if we discover nothing by tomorrow I guess we could run it again and hope for the best.
This keeps me again wondering. What if one day for a reason or another the bot will get really mad? Would be rather hard to reverse the damage. Any comments? Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 03:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I am almost finished with the "backup on disk feature", I think I will complete it tomorrow.
I reverted by hand the first 25 pages of Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biography articles by quality, containing all FA-Class, A-Class, GA-Class, B-Class and a bunch of Start-Class articles (note by the way the corrupted text at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biography articles by quality/6 ( specific version link), I don't understand what is going on).
I tested the bot just in case on the Adelaide project, and nothing strange happens.
So, with the evidence so far that the problem is most likely not with the bot but with the Biography project, I restarted the bot for today. Hopefully nothing wrong will happen. Once the backup feature is finished, even if something wrong happens it will be easier to revert (not that I should become more sloppy as a coder :)
Good night, all. :) Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 05:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
May just be that it has stopped again - this time at about 7:30 at the end of "Albums" :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/ (Desk) 10:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
The film stats didn't update last night so I tried to run the bot on demand. It worked unti it got here:
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=Unassessed+importance+film+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=List+of+films+made+into+television+programs
It just stopped. Do you know what the problem is? Cbrown1023 17:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Biography's in trouble again. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 20:58, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I will keep that in mind. But there's got to be more to it. Per the log, the bot started reading the B-Class biography articles, read the articles starting with A, then B, then C, all the way to J, and then simply did not go on. Here's the relevant part in the log
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=Andy+Warhol
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=Bo+Schembechler
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=Constantine+Maroulis
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=El+Greco
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=Gessius+Florus
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=Isabella%2c+Countess+of+Atholl
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=B-Class+biography+articles&format=txt&cpfrom=John+H.+Russell%2c+Jr.
Getting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/query.php?what=category&cptitle=Start-Class+biography+articles&format=txt
(look at the last too lines, it just went from B-Class to Start-Class). Even if the B-Class category was jumbled, it should have still yielded some articles beyond J. When I ran the bot manually this afternoon, it easily went beyond J. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 01:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I was doing some testing for the bot and found articles disappearing, see Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Pokémon Collaborative Project articles by quality/1 history. That is very strange. I am taking the bot down for today, hopefully one of these days I'll find out what is going on. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 02:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
So, the bot has not been working well recetnly, and I think this started with me switching to Yurik's query format for reading categories. I decided to go back to the old way of reading categories, parsing html source. That also has problems, like sometimes the wiki servers change the format of html (and the bot is confused) and sometimes they serve cached info, but let us see if the switch back will deal with the problems with the biography articles.
I implemented a couple of routines which will hopefully make the bot automatically recover if articles go missing.
The way things are now, if say a bot did not read well a category (be it either its fault or server's fault), some articles will disappear from the worklists. Next time the bot runs it may read that category well and recover an article in the list. What would be lost however, would be the history link and the date (column 1 and 3 here for example).
In addition to doing the backup mentioned somewhere in the previous sections, I now store on disk the history links and dates for the last five days (all in one single file for each project). So, if an article goes missing, and pops up back in a day or two, the bot will check on disk if that article has been around recently. If yes, and if the quality assessment did not change, the bot will recover the old history link and date from disk, so that info won't be lost.
In short, now the bot not only writes backups, it also reads backups, and vital info is not stored only within the Wikipedia worklists but also on disk. Here's a demonstration: I removed a few articles, and the bot put them back without information loss.
I will let the bot run today. Let's see what happens. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 04:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
When loading the Album articles and identifying the different versions, when the bot doesn't find a version then there is an automatic error as in Noxious Saucy Beast and Here We Are (Swizzle Tree) where they have been fixed ... I have removed the tag for there is no article attached to the talk page. I think this might be the what causes the problem. Lincher 07:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
What's up with the bot. There hasn't been a full run in 3 days. Rlevse 23:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
... because of a power outage at my work. The power is still out, perhaps it will come back later tonight. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 01:29, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Until now, when an article got renamed, the bot would consider that the old article disappeared and a new article got created. Now I modified the script to actually copy over the history link and date to the new article. I don't know how necessary that is, but I would think it makes more sense that way. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 05:18, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Quite a lot of the articles in the list are redlinks, but their talk pages list the article as B-Class, etc. I wrote a script to tag such talk pages for speedy deletion. They will also show up in Category:Wikipedia 1.0 problematic articles for people to take a closer look. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 06:12, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Category:Wikipedia Version 0.5 is very huge I think. Is perhaps time to split it according to individual projects, say Category:Military history version 0.5 articles? That would require modifying the assessment templates for all the projects (e.g., {{ WPMILHIST}}), but I'd think that at some point this may need to be done. Comments? Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 20:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
(Moved "BozMo's first cut to Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#BozMo's first cut)
WikiProject Louisville has recently started seriously doing assessment work. I was wondering if templates and categories covered by our project could also be hit by the bot for the sake of statistics/logs. It would be very helpful. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 17:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Something is strange here. Look at the Scouting project tag here: Talk:Stanisław Broniewski, the ratings display correctly, note the talk page show no change in Dec. Then look here under Dec 24, [7], the importance was removed and then here at the bottom the importance doesn't show up: [8]. Why did this happen, the rating did not change but the bot processed it as if it were? Thanks. Rlevse 10:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)