![]() | Articles for creation Project‑class | ||||||
|
I guess I'm too much of an inclusionist. Two of the 3 articles I've created have already been PRODded. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 05:20, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Feel free to revert me but I'm going to be bold and make a few changes to the awards. Firstly, I want to replace the "Barnstar Eaten by a Bear" award because it was intended to be handed out "[...]to any Wikipedian who says something very humorous and or random, thus cheering up fellow Wikipedians who read it". I will replace it with "The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar" because it "[...] may be awarded to those who work tirelessly and endlessly on the more laborious or repetitive of Wikipedia tasks".
Also, I think that the top 3 contributers should receive something so I found these:
Finally, what is the AFC barnstar? I do not believe that it is listed as a barnstar. If it does not exist, maybe for 50 articles the original barnstar should be given and The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar should be for 100 articles.
I hope that these changes will be okay! Greeves ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
What is the sandwich of exceptional excellence? Greeves ( talk • contribs) 13:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
When all the {{afc maybe}} tags disappear, the article goes off the list, even if there are unreviewed articles. The cure is to add {{afc n}} until the articles are all reviewed or mass-reviewed. I've done this with 2006-12-12. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 01:11, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Do recent AFC submissions count toward the total? How "recent" (like within the last month?) should we count reviews for the backlog drive? -- Hdt83 Chat 04:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
On a similar note, does it count if you moderate/close a request that had been responded to before they started archiving requests? Personally, I'm for including all of them--i.e. you deal with a submission:you get a point.-- Xnuala ( talk)( Review) 05:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
All AfC pages from January to March 2006 are tagged with {{afc c}} or {{afc n}}, save one that I tagged {{afc mass}}. Note that some of the c's and n's have mass-moderated articles. Why did I bother with 2006? Call it a typo. I meant to do 1Q07. That's next on my list. April January-July 2007 are already tagged. Can everyone do a month or two in 2006, so we can get the backlog category properly populated? If you just flag "n" or "c" and do nothing else, you should be able to do 1-2 months per hour, maybe more.
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs)/(
e-mail) 20:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC) edited
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs)/(
e-mail)
04:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Backlog now tagged afc n, c, or mass for December '06. Only April-November '06 left to tag. The good news is there don't appear to be any pages from before 2006-01-02. That page has nearly a month of submissions in it. Would everyone please sign up to do a month? I'm grabbing November in about 15-20 hours if nobody grabs it first. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Does this project include the backlog from 2005 and earlier? Let's not do that until 2006 is done. We are one week into this project and the projected 2006 backlog should keep us busy well past August 15. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 04:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
There are currently 126 pages on the backlog. 115 are for Jan-Mar 2006 and Jan-May 2007. June 2007 is clear :). That's about 11-12 pages a month in backlog for 17 months. That's almost 200 pages. If you figure 1 article a page will come out of that, that's almost 200 articles to transcribe and talk pages to update. The {{afc top|mm}} is an additional burden: Adding it around each and every group of mass-moderated articles takes unnecessary time if you are doing the whole page at once. I propose that IF you are closing out a page with {{afc mass}}, you can dispense with putting afc tags around the articles in question. The other alternative is to put afc-mm tags around all the submissions as a single group. I personally don't like that approach, as it hides section names that have nothing to do with the submissions being mass-moderated. {{afc top|mm}} is useful if you are marking several articles on a page but not finishing the page right then. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 05:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
We need to get an idea of just what is in the backlog. This means adding {{ afc n}}, {{ afc c}}, or {{ afc mass}} to each and every page. Note that not every day as an AFC archive page.
Please sign up for a month so we don't stomp on each other.
Instructions: Type in the URL for each backlog page in the month. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2006-12-01, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2006-12-02, etc. to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2006-12-31. Occasionally there is no page for a day or a group of days, particularly for older dates. For each backlog page, skim the page and add the appropriate {{ afc n}}, {{ afc c}}, or {{ afc mass}} tag. Mass should be used only if someone else has already mass-reviewed at least one article or you are summarily rejecting at least one article without going through the normal "decline" procedure.
Give yourself a wikicookie for every month you complete.
UPDATE: January and February 2006 are marked as completed in the
older submissions list, but I marked 5 days with open submissions in the
backlog category.
Once a page is marked {{ afc n}} someone else can come in behind you and clear the page's backlog. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 04:11, 24 July 2007 (UTC), added UPDATE davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 23:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC), added Instructions davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 23:39, 25 July 2007 (UTC) cleaned up and archiving now that work is done and Jan/Feb 2006 articles are no longer in the needing-review queue. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 15:54, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Do I need to place {{ subst:afc top}} and {{ subst:afc b}} on each suggestion that has already been reviewed but does not have those tags before I close the Archive {{ afc: c}}? -- Counterpart0 21:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
If you just want to add {{ afc c}} or {{ afc mass}} to the top of a page, it's a pain to edit the whole page.
This note on the Village Pump shows you how to add a "0" tab next to the "edit this page" tab. It is like an link but just for the top section. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 00:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
We are almost at the 1/3 way point. We have 700 articles reviewed. That probably amounts to 5-10 weeks' worth of submissions. Great job guys.
There are 207 pages in the official to-do list. This represents about 9 1/2 months worth of backlog. I figure 2 out of every 3 days has a backlog, so we should expect that to grow by 100 pages when we add in the 4 months of May-September 2006.
As you can see, we are 1/3 way through our time but probably cleared less than 20% of the actual backlog. If we don't add more people or extend the effort, we are going to have to give up some worthy articles.
My recommendations:
Need help rating an article? Try Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:42, 25 July 2007 (UTC) "Many reviewers disagree" comment added davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 12:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't suppose there is an easier way to keep track of your review count than recounting, or coming back to add to your score every few reviews? -- Counterpart0 18:28, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
For example, this page here Wikipedia:Articles for creation/2006-02-23 is actually done. Every submission has a comment, either declined or created, so the archive is done. Can one just go ahead and mark it- {{afc c}}? Thanks Theone00 21:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
When I try to add the {{afc n}} to the AFC Archive 2006-05-06 I get a notice that there is spam in the page and it cannot be saved - checked my computer no spyware, malware or adware that I can find. And so far I have been able to save to pages before and after. Any suggestions? -- Counterpart0 17:11, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
edit§ion=0
We will probably hit 1000 sometime Friday!
On another note, there are only two months plus one page that are left to tag {{ afc c}}, {{ afc n}}, or {{ afc mass}}. Let's see if we can get these knocked out over the weekend! davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Much of April 2006 has
Category:Wikipedia article creation requests needing further review
in the page, usually near the top. This should not be here. Articles are added to this category through the {{
afc maybe}} template. As you do the April 2006 articles, please remove this category.
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs)/(
e-mail) 04:36, 28 July 2007 (UTC) done.
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs)/(
e-mail)
15:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Xnuala is now an admin. Hand that man a broom! davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 15:55, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
If the 15 of us each take a page a day, that will make a big dent :). davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 16:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm creating about 5-6% of articles I review. If everyone else is doing the same that's about 88-105 new articles added to Wikipedia because of this drive. Way to go everyone! I suspect the rate for others is higher since I was in a hurry to put "afc n" or "afc mass" on the entire backlog and tagged a number of articles as "maybe" for later creation. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
About 1-2 submission page archives per month are "hiding" submissions with incorrect {{subst:afc b}}s. I've audited July 2007 and fixed 2 mistakes. The rest of the months going back to December 2005 need to be audited also. It takes about 15 5 minutes per month if there are no mistakes.
The easiest way to check is to see if the last article is a "collapsed" accept or reject, and if it is, does it contain any unprocessed articles? If so, it needs to be fixed.
If the last article is a multi-article blue subst:afc top|mm then make sure there is a matching subst:afc b somewhere. If there isn't, it's likely someone made a mistake and the mass-moderation may have been meant for only 1 article. When in doubt, re-review.
Please update as you complete these:
Thanks. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Update: March 20, 2006-May 17, 2007 are still being actively worked. Since it's possible to introduce a missing-subst:afc b tag while working the article, I recommend holding off each month until that month's archives have been evaluated.
I tweaked {{ afc top}}. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#Minor changes to AFC top template for details. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 17:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
At 18:26, 3 August 2007 we passed 2000 articles reviewed. 3000 is well within reach for the last 10 days. We are down to 200 pages from March 2006-January 2007 and another 67 from February to May 2007. I think we were over 288 at one point. Surely we can clear out everything through August 2006 before the drive ends. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 15:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
I noticed Boricuaeddie had removed Rlest's total from the board - I realize the guy has been blocked, pending a community ban, but should we really remove him from the list? He reviewed 327 articles at last count, and was in second place. It's not as though the block erases his contributions - the articles still got reviewed. Hersfold ( talk/ work) 03:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Is now cleared. Many congratulations to all involved. Now onto it's much larger sub catagory. Theone00 15:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
I had an idea. We are doing so well with this, and because every day articles go un-reviewed, maybe in a year we could do this again! We could do it every year! Cheers, JetLover (talk) 02:29, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
If we could leave "only" 12 months of backlog by the time the drive ends that would be fantastic. Right now there are 243 days' worth of submissions spread over exactly 13 months, plus a a day from this week. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 04:10, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
We are down to the last 5 days so to celebrate I'll give anyone who Creates 5 or more new articles between now and the 15th a special {{ The Working Man's Barnstar}} aka The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar. This is over and above any other award. Put "WMB: number" in the comments on the tote-board so I can keep count. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 04:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
You "officially" put us over 3000 articles reviewed since July 15! I know at least a couple editors whose counts aren't up to date so the actual person could've been anyone in the last few hundred reviews or so. If everyone brought their numbers up to date I bet we could show 4000 by the 15th. Even if they don't, I bet we can get to 3500. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 14:14, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
13 more and we'll have less than half a year spread over less than 11 months to do. How much can we do over the next 3 days?
Keep up to good work, everyone, only two days left! Hersfold ( t/ a/ c) 17:52, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I just marked January and February 2007 as completed, after finishing the last few bits - an insignificant effort compared to the huge amounts of work you guys have put in! With that, all of the backlog for this year is gone! Great work everyone, but kudos especially to GrooveDog who organized this drive! henrik• talk 22:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Assuming the drive ends at 00:00:00 August 16 UTC, that's less than 12 hours left.
We are very close to 5000 articles reviewed. Can we get to 5000?
By the way, I think it's OK if you add to your totals after midnight, as long as you earned them before midnight and add them in a timely manner, say, within 24 hours. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 12:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
The official drive and the awards count end at midnight but the unofficial drive continues.
Some of us will be taking a short sanity break from AFC work. Even if we scale our work back to a reasonable pace, together we can easily get this backlog cleared by Christmas, maybe even by Halloween.
I'll create a new toteboard for work done after midnight. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 12:38, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Only a few minutes ago, it turned into August 16th! Please update your count! Cheers, JetLover (talk) 00:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
That's subject to updates by the way. Way to go team! At least a couple reviewers had "+" next to their numbers. Oh, and speedy-deleted articles count as submissions reviewed. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 01:39, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
![]() | Articles for creation Project‑class | ||||||
|
I guess I'm too much of an inclusionist. Two of the 3 articles I've created have already been PRODded. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 05:20, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Feel free to revert me but I'm going to be bold and make a few changes to the awards. Firstly, I want to replace the "Barnstar Eaten by a Bear" award because it was intended to be handed out "[...]to any Wikipedian who says something very humorous and or random, thus cheering up fellow Wikipedians who read it". I will replace it with "The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar" because it "[...] may be awarded to those who work tirelessly and endlessly on the more laborious or repetitive of Wikipedia tasks".
Also, I think that the top 3 contributers should receive something so I found these:
Finally, what is the AFC barnstar? I do not believe that it is listed as a barnstar. If it does not exist, maybe for 50 articles the original barnstar should be given and The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar should be for 100 articles.
I hope that these changes will be okay! Greeves ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
What is the sandwich of exceptional excellence? Greeves ( talk • contribs) 13:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
When all the {{afc maybe}} tags disappear, the article goes off the list, even if there are unreviewed articles. The cure is to add {{afc n}} until the articles are all reviewed or mass-reviewed. I've done this with 2006-12-12. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 01:11, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Do recent AFC submissions count toward the total? How "recent" (like within the last month?) should we count reviews for the backlog drive? -- Hdt83 Chat 04:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
On a similar note, does it count if you moderate/close a request that had been responded to before they started archiving requests? Personally, I'm for including all of them--i.e. you deal with a submission:you get a point.-- Xnuala ( talk)( Review) 05:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
All AfC pages from January to March 2006 are tagged with {{afc c}} or {{afc n}}, save one that I tagged {{afc mass}}. Note that some of the c's and n's have mass-moderated articles. Why did I bother with 2006? Call it a typo. I meant to do 1Q07. That's next on my list. April January-July 2007 are already tagged. Can everyone do a month or two in 2006, so we can get the backlog category properly populated? If you just flag "n" or "c" and do nothing else, you should be able to do 1-2 months per hour, maybe more.
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs)/(
e-mail) 20:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC) edited
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs)/(
e-mail)
04:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Backlog now tagged afc n, c, or mass for December '06. Only April-November '06 left to tag. The good news is there don't appear to be any pages from before 2006-01-02. That page has nearly a month of submissions in it. Would everyone please sign up to do a month? I'm grabbing November in about 15-20 hours if nobody grabs it first. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Does this project include the backlog from 2005 and earlier? Let's not do that until 2006 is done. We are one week into this project and the projected 2006 backlog should keep us busy well past August 15. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 04:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
There are currently 126 pages on the backlog. 115 are for Jan-Mar 2006 and Jan-May 2007. June 2007 is clear :). That's about 11-12 pages a month in backlog for 17 months. That's almost 200 pages. If you figure 1 article a page will come out of that, that's almost 200 articles to transcribe and talk pages to update. The {{afc top|mm}} is an additional burden: Adding it around each and every group of mass-moderated articles takes unnecessary time if you are doing the whole page at once. I propose that IF you are closing out a page with {{afc mass}}, you can dispense with putting afc tags around the articles in question. The other alternative is to put afc-mm tags around all the submissions as a single group. I personally don't like that approach, as it hides section names that have nothing to do with the submissions being mass-moderated. {{afc top|mm}} is useful if you are marking several articles on a page but not finishing the page right then. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 05:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
We need to get an idea of just what is in the backlog. This means adding {{ afc n}}, {{ afc c}}, or {{ afc mass}} to each and every page. Note that not every day as an AFC archive page.
Please sign up for a month so we don't stomp on each other.
Instructions: Type in the URL for each backlog page in the month. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2006-12-01, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2006-12-02, etc. to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/2006-12-31. Occasionally there is no page for a day or a group of days, particularly for older dates. For each backlog page, skim the page and add the appropriate {{ afc n}}, {{ afc c}}, or {{ afc mass}} tag. Mass should be used only if someone else has already mass-reviewed at least one article or you are summarily rejecting at least one article without going through the normal "decline" procedure.
Give yourself a wikicookie for every month you complete.
UPDATE: January and February 2006 are marked as completed in the
older submissions list, but I marked 5 days with open submissions in the
backlog category.
Once a page is marked {{ afc n}} someone else can come in behind you and clear the page's backlog. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 04:11, 24 July 2007 (UTC), added UPDATE davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 23:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC), added Instructions davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 23:39, 25 July 2007 (UTC) cleaned up and archiving now that work is done and Jan/Feb 2006 articles are no longer in the needing-review queue. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 15:54, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Do I need to place {{ subst:afc top}} and {{ subst:afc b}} on each suggestion that has already been reviewed but does not have those tags before I close the Archive {{ afc: c}}? -- Counterpart0 21:32, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
If you just want to add {{ afc c}} or {{ afc mass}} to the top of a page, it's a pain to edit the whole page.
This note on the Village Pump shows you how to add a "0" tab next to the "edit this page" tab. It is like an link but just for the top section. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 00:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
We are almost at the 1/3 way point. We have 700 articles reviewed. That probably amounts to 5-10 weeks' worth of submissions. Great job guys.
There are 207 pages in the official to-do list. This represents about 9 1/2 months worth of backlog. I figure 2 out of every 3 days has a backlog, so we should expect that to grow by 100 pages when we add in the 4 months of May-September 2006.
As you can see, we are 1/3 way through our time but probably cleared less than 20% of the actual backlog. If we don't add more people or extend the effort, we are going to have to give up some worthy articles.
My recommendations:
Need help rating an article? Try Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:42, 25 July 2007 (UTC) "Many reviewers disagree" comment added davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 12:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't suppose there is an easier way to keep track of your review count than recounting, or coming back to add to your score every few reviews? -- Counterpart0 18:28, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
For example, this page here Wikipedia:Articles for creation/2006-02-23 is actually done. Every submission has a comment, either declined or created, so the archive is done. Can one just go ahead and mark it- {{afc c}}? Thanks Theone00 21:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
When I try to add the {{afc n}} to the AFC Archive 2006-05-06 I get a notice that there is spam in the page and it cannot be saved - checked my computer no spyware, malware or adware that I can find. And so far I have been able to save to pages before and after. Any suggestions? -- Counterpart0 17:11, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
edit§ion=0
We will probably hit 1000 sometime Friday!
On another note, there are only two months plus one page that are left to tag {{ afc c}}, {{ afc n}}, or {{ afc mass}}. Let's see if we can get these knocked out over the weekend! davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Much of April 2006 has
Category:Wikipedia article creation requests needing further review
in the page, usually near the top. This should not be here. Articles are added to this category through the {{
afc maybe}} template. As you do the April 2006 articles, please remove this category.
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs)/(
e-mail) 04:36, 28 July 2007 (UTC) done.
davidwr/(
talk)/(
contribs)/(
e-mail)
15:51, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Xnuala is now an admin. Hand that man a broom! davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 15:55, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
If the 15 of us each take a page a day, that will make a big dent :). davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 16:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm creating about 5-6% of articles I review. If everyone else is doing the same that's about 88-105 new articles added to Wikipedia because of this drive. Way to go everyone! I suspect the rate for others is higher since I was in a hurry to put "afc n" or "afc mass" on the entire backlog and tagged a number of articles as "maybe" for later creation. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
About 1-2 submission page archives per month are "hiding" submissions with incorrect {{subst:afc b}}s. I've audited July 2007 and fixed 2 mistakes. The rest of the months going back to December 2005 need to be audited also. It takes about 15 5 minutes per month if there are no mistakes.
The easiest way to check is to see if the last article is a "collapsed" accept or reject, and if it is, does it contain any unprocessed articles? If so, it needs to be fixed.
If the last article is a multi-article blue subst:afc top|mm then make sure there is a matching subst:afc b somewhere. If there isn't, it's likely someone made a mistake and the mass-moderation may have been meant for only 1 article. When in doubt, re-review.
Please update as you complete these:
Thanks. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 03:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Update: March 20, 2006-May 17, 2007 are still being actively worked. Since it's possible to introduce a missing-subst:afc b tag while working the article, I recommend holding off each month until that month's archives have been evaluated.
I tweaked {{ afc top}}. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#Minor changes to AFC top template for details. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 17:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
At 18:26, 3 August 2007 we passed 2000 articles reviewed. 3000 is well within reach for the last 10 days. We are down to 200 pages from March 2006-January 2007 and another 67 from February to May 2007. I think we were over 288 at one point. Surely we can clear out everything through August 2006 before the drive ends. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 15:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
I noticed Boricuaeddie had removed Rlest's total from the board - I realize the guy has been blocked, pending a community ban, but should we really remove him from the list? He reviewed 327 articles at last count, and was in second place. It's not as though the block erases his contributions - the articles still got reviewed. Hersfold ( talk/ work) 03:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Is now cleared. Many congratulations to all involved. Now onto it's much larger sub catagory. Theone00 15:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
I had an idea. We are doing so well with this, and because every day articles go un-reviewed, maybe in a year we could do this again! We could do it every year! Cheers, JetLover (talk) 02:29, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
If we could leave "only" 12 months of backlog by the time the drive ends that would be fantastic. Right now there are 243 days' worth of submissions spread over exactly 13 months, plus a a day from this week. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 04:10, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
We are down to the last 5 days so to celebrate I'll give anyone who Creates 5 or more new articles between now and the 15th a special {{ The Working Man's Barnstar}} aka The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar. This is over and above any other award. Put "WMB: number" in the comments on the tote-board so I can keep count. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 04:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
You "officially" put us over 3000 articles reviewed since July 15! I know at least a couple editors whose counts aren't up to date so the actual person could've been anyone in the last few hundred reviews or so. If everyone brought their numbers up to date I bet we could show 4000 by the 15th. Even if they don't, I bet we can get to 3500. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 14:14, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
13 more and we'll have less than half a year spread over less than 11 months to do. How much can we do over the next 3 days?
Keep up to good work, everyone, only two days left! Hersfold ( t/ a/ c) 17:52, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I just marked January and February 2007 as completed, after finishing the last few bits - an insignificant effort compared to the huge amounts of work you guys have put in! With that, all of the backlog for this year is gone! Great work everyone, but kudos especially to GrooveDog who organized this drive! henrik• talk 22:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Assuming the drive ends at 00:00:00 August 16 UTC, that's less than 12 hours left.
We are very close to 5000 articles reviewed. Can we get to 5000?
By the way, I think it's OK if you add to your totals after midnight, as long as you earned them before midnight and add them in a timely manner, say, within 24 hours. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 12:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
The official drive and the awards count end at midnight but the unofficial drive continues.
Some of us will be taking a short sanity break from AFC work. Even if we scale our work back to a reasonable pace, together we can easily get this backlog cleared by Christmas, maybe even by Halloween.
I'll create a new toteboard for work done after midnight. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 12:38, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Only a few minutes ago, it turned into August 16th! Please update your count! Cheers, JetLover (talk) 00:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
That's subject to updates by the way. Way to go team! At least a couple reviewers had "+" next to their numbers. Oh, and speedy-deleted articles count as submissions reviewed. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 01:39, 16 August 2007 (UTC)