NOTICE: Please put all proposals for future missions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Featured articles/FA-Team/Mission Proposals rather than on this talk page.
Some editors of the Economics Wikiproject are trying our best to bring Adam Smith up to FA status. Any help you could lend would be most appreciated. Remember ( talk) 17:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) ...hence the need for someone/ones who can decide what we work on (or at least, facilitate a discussion), and then poke team members until things happen. I'd offer my services, although I'm not the most active editor on the team and busy elsewhere with my limited wikitime. It would be a shame to let things die away though. EyeSerene talk 10:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Looking through the list of proposals, I think some should be promoted to missions. I've just checked the state of the articles, and it seems to me that the articles that have a good level of citations and current active editing are these:
Would anyone object if I added these to the missions page (and crossed the MMM project off)? Then all, hmmm, that's needed is for members to go out and help. qp10qp ( talk) 01:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC) (By the way, I am not co-ordinating, just fusspotting.)
But here's a thought... Perhaps we should have a page such as the MMM one for all the articles on which the FA-Team is working. Essentially, after all, the MMM "mission" was a series of mini-missions; not every member of the FA-Team was equally involved with each article. So people could sign up for individual articles, and some kind of coordinator role would be to ensure that each article was covered in some way. Then there could be discussion as at WT:Mission1, when particular articles needed help or a fresh set of eyes.
(outdent:) Another thing that we could take from the MMM model, and I think it might be handy, would be to set deadlines. After all, MMM took quite a long time to get up and running; then it became quite frantic (in good and productive ways) towards the end. However artificial it is, one condition of accepting a mission could be that the proposer set a deadline: FA by such-and-such a date. -- jbmurray ( talk • contribs) 01:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
So, thinking about it more, here's a proposal...
This is fairly simple and unbureaucratic, requires a minimum of coordination, though perhaps each mission could be assigned a coordinator, and a couple of us could take on the role of informal general coordination. It prevents dispersion and encourages cross-fertilization, without meaning that each FA-Team member feels he or she needs to be involved with each mission.
Waddaya think? -- jbmurray ( talk • contribs) 02:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
It's my understanding that a major goal here is to spawn new Wikipedians who are already content experts. It's my belief that some of the changes I see at Wikipedia...including the existence of the FA-Team...are going to be very attractive to academicians. I just got a pleasant reply from someone at Rice University, who expressed interest but asked me what a "Wikipedian" was and how I could verify that I was one, and I sent this back, I'd appreciate feedback of all kinds:
[begin] I'm not offended at all, in fact I'm glad you asked. Wikipedia is a lot like France right after the French Revolution...everyone takes great pride in not taking any pride and just calling themselves a citizen :) My username is Dank55, and if you click on the "history" and "discussion" tabs at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot, you'll see I have a long history of commenting on and changing the article. You're welcome to visit my userpage at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dank55. If you are looking for any particular type of confirmation, I'll be happy to oblige.
Btw, big things are happening at Wikipedia. We've known for years that there are several things that academicians really want that they haven't gotten from Wikipedia...and that has been partly intentional, I think we were afraid of being pushed around by people smarter than us :)...but many things are changing this year: 1. There seems to be strong support now for a feature that's currently on the German Wikipedia, where all non-logged-in users and some logged-in users won't see vandalized pages in general, they will only see pages that have been "checked", and this may overcome the objection we have sometimes heard from academicians that Wikipedia requires them to "babysit" their contributions. 2. We are working very hard to increase the quality on enough articles so that we can start distributing a printed version of "the best of Wikipedia", probably next year. 3. We have a lot of volunteers now working with academicians to get them up to speed on all aspects of Wikipedia.
If you know content experts (of any kind) who are interested in writing articles but have found Wikipedia a "turn-off", please send them my way, and I'll be happy to answer questions and point them to likely colleagues on Wikipedia.
Dan - Dan Dank55 ( talk)( mistakes) 03:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm dark on the idea of offering some kind of service to intending nominators: they will come to rely on it. The whole point of the FA process is to encourage the kind of collaborations that will produce FA standards, and a drive-by wash-as-you-watch car-cleaning service will discourage collaborations.
What would be useful is a register of copy-editors along the lines of LOCE. I don't think a list needs to be content-related, since the nominators are presumably the content experts. When they get to the FAC room, their problems are typically process-related, and don't rely on knowledge of a particular area.
It might be good to have a list of reviewers; unsure. Reviewers need to be rewarded for their efforts somehow.
Aside from that, I can only say that the process will just bumble through as it has done for years, but that we should feel pleased that significantly higher standards are (mostly) enforced compared with even a year or two ago. Tony (talk) 11:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I must say I used to proclaim loudly that editing a pile of text was better than starting from scratch, however I may have to eat my words with White-winged Fairy-wren..in any case loads of people have been helpful and I think it is more polished now. I promise I will do more serious articles after this...well maybe not straightaway but I'll get Bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder to FAC sometime this year. Cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 10:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Textual criticism.
The help of good copy-editors is much needed. This is a complex subject that needs the caring hand of editors that can make a complex subject to be readable as per the comments made in the bottom of that FA review. Thank you in advance for your consideration. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
...is now at FAC. Budding Journalist 15:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
On a related note, Everglades is at Peer Review. It is the longest article I've contributed to at 63k (readable prose). With the four satellite articles, I have placed them simultaneously at PR and GA, but I think this one needs extra help before it goes to GA. My concern is that its length and detail are too overwhelming, much the way that I can't seem to get through the lead of Roman Catholic Church. I'm asking anyone who has a spare moment to read through and give suggestions. Thank you. -- Moni3 ( talk) 15:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Just wanted to let everyone know King Arthur is a featured article as of yesterday. -- Meldshal (talk to me) 13:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
There is another teaching assignment that is ending soon (July 21 I believe), where the teacher is trying to get her students to make five articles up to GA status. You could always help out with this, but I'm afraid more help may be needed than the MMM project. The project page is here - User:Piotrus/Teaching assignment. Remember ( talk) 12:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
After innocently adding my name to the list of participants, according to the house style, I noticed to my horror that the project page was rife with (children: avert your eyes) spaced em dashes. I can only conclude that this project is a subtle attempt by existing FA owners to ensure well-referenced FA candidates fail for MOS-compliance. Fie, for shame! Skomorokh 03:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Just notifying everyone. -- Meldshal (§peak to me) 13:41, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Here. Further help with Scattered disc and Solar energy would be much appreciated. Geometry guy 21:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Let me offer to you our information booklet, which we edited on the Czech Wikiproject Quality: w:cs:Wikipedie:WikiProjekt Kvalita/brožura. The summary is in English languege. You can also translate it whole, using Google translate. PDF version is being under processed, within few days. Any articles, ideas, opinions are welcome (even in English) for the next volume here.-- Juan de Vojníkov ( talk) 21:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I have been working on Tourism in the United States, and all the content there at the moment was written by myself. Its obviously an incomplete piece of work, but it seems like an ideal project for the FA-Team. I didn't add a proposal because it seems the project focuses on groups of articles. At any rate, I think some sort of collaboration could bring this article to FA status eventually. — Wackymacs ( talk ~ edits) 12:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
If anyone is interested in classical music - December 22, 2008 will mark the 200 anniversary of the first performance of Beethoven's fifth symphony. The article is currently a A-class article, but it would be nice to get it up to FA status and put on the main page for the 200 year anniversary. Remember ( talk) 16:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
We need fact checkers! Please help us out! Thanks! Awadewit ( talk) 14:28, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I'm wondering if members of this project might have time to help copyediting Alien (film). It's currently at FAC and some concerns about prose have been brought up. I've gone over Tony's guides but I feel I am too close to the text (being the primary contributor) to be able to take an objective eye and work out the kinks. Jappalang recommended that I contact this project, so I'm hoping that one or more members might have time to lend an eye to the article. Thanks very much for your consideration. -- IllaZilla ( talk) 23:32, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I've been working on this article and would like to recieve some suggestions on how to improve this article for a FA nomination. Thanks! Shinerunner ( talk) 01:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
My message is not related to Featured Articles, but please bear with me. I'll be brief.
Tim Vickers, whom many of you may know, and I are giving a hands-on workshop in creating scientific articles for Wikipedia at the upcoming meeting of the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB) in San Francisco. The workshop will take place on December 16th for two hours, from 12:30–2:30pm local time, which is 20:30–22:30 UTC (Wikipedia time). We're expecting roughly 60 newbie scientists, who will be eager to start articles and upload images for their favorite research topics. We're hoping that you will consider volunteering to help the scientists to craft these new articles and give them a good impression of how Wikipedians can pull together for a common cause. This seems like a great opportunity to build bridges with academics, and if we're successful, other invitations from scientific bodies will likely follow. I know this to be the home of many excellent and helpful editors. Please write us to volunteer to help; we'll keep you posted, individually, on the workshop and how it will run. Thanks! Proteins ( talk) 23:07, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your support, Dan! I hope that the scientists will work on their articles after the workshop, and eventually bring them to GAN and FAC. Tim and I and the other workshop volunteers will be trying to inspire them. If you (or anyone else here) happened to be available during the workshop hours to help out, that would be much appreciated as well. BTW, thanks for volunteering to test my MOS:HEAD-checking script; your feedback will be very helpful. I'm planning on adding other MoS checks once the present script seems OK. Suggestions/requests for other useful programs are always welcome, Proteins ( talk) 12:40, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello FA Team!
I am a student from WikiProject AP Biology 2008, and it is my mission to get the North American River Otter article to FA status. Anybody willing to join in on the fun is more than welcome to, as I always welcome assistance and support with open arms.
Best regards, -- Wikitrevor ( talk) 22:31, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
-- Wikitrevor ( talk) 17:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
There is a plan to bring the Oil shale extraction article to FA status and renominate it for FAC. Any assistance, such as reviewing and editing, as also as any critical comment is appreciated. Beagel ( talk) 10:59, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
I tagged the WikiProject FA page dead a while back, and that doesn't seem to have been controversial. Although this message might be better suited there, no one watches that page, and it would likely have gone unnoticed.
I propose doing something to reincarnate this project, because we had a beautiful thing going. As I recall, this was supposed to help new users with expertise in a particular subject area but no familiarity with FAC and whatnot get their article promoted. I want to try the exact opposite, experienced editors with little knowledge of a subject trying to achieve an FA. Although this might seem a bit silly, I also propose we do it in a neglected subject area—I'm thinking food. Only nine FAs are in the food and drink category, and just three of those are on actual dishes. I've figured that if a model was written, more users would write about the subject. I completely open to the article suggestions, but just to throw some out, pasta, caesar salad, french fries, etc. And suggestions (or requests for me to leave this page and never come back) are welcome. Cheers, Mm40 ( talk) 04:45, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
Addendum: message left at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink asking for food-smart editors. Mm40 ( talk) 14:29, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
I was able to recruit quite a few FA members to do a bit of work on Operation Schadenfreude. There's always the option to help finish off that push as well. Mkdw talk 02:46, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
It's a big job, but a worthwhile one. Details at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine/Google Project. -- Arcadian ( talk) 14:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
NOTICE: Please put all proposals for future missions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Featured articles/FA-Team/Mission Proposals rather than on this talk page.
Some editors of the Economics Wikiproject are trying our best to bring Adam Smith up to FA status. Any help you could lend would be most appreciated. Remember ( talk) 17:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
(outdent) ...hence the need for someone/ones who can decide what we work on (or at least, facilitate a discussion), and then poke team members until things happen. I'd offer my services, although I'm not the most active editor on the team and busy elsewhere with my limited wikitime. It would be a shame to let things die away though. EyeSerene talk 10:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Looking through the list of proposals, I think some should be promoted to missions. I've just checked the state of the articles, and it seems to me that the articles that have a good level of citations and current active editing are these:
Would anyone object if I added these to the missions page (and crossed the MMM project off)? Then all, hmmm, that's needed is for members to go out and help. qp10qp ( talk) 01:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC) (By the way, I am not co-ordinating, just fusspotting.)
But here's a thought... Perhaps we should have a page such as the MMM one for all the articles on which the FA-Team is working. Essentially, after all, the MMM "mission" was a series of mini-missions; not every member of the FA-Team was equally involved with each article. So people could sign up for individual articles, and some kind of coordinator role would be to ensure that each article was covered in some way. Then there could be discussion as at WT:Mission1, when particular articles needed help or a fresh set of eyes.
(outdent:) Another thing that we could take from the MMM model, and I think it might be handy, would be to set deadlines. After all, MMM took quite a long time to get up and running; then it became quite frantic (in good and productive ways) towards the end. However artificial it is, one condition of accepting a mission could be that the proposer set a deadline: FA by such-and-such a date. -- jbmurray ( talk • contribs) 01:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
So, thinking about it more, here's a proposal...
This is fairly simple and unbureaucratic, requires a minimum of coordination, though perhaps each mission could be assigned a coordinator, and a couple of us could take on the role of informal general coordination. It prevents dispersion and encourages cross-fertilization, without meaning that each FA-Team member feels he or she needs to be involved with each mission.
Waddaya think? -- jbmurray ( talk • contribs) 02:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
It's my understanding that a major goal here is to spawn new Wikipedians who are already content experts. It's my belief that some of the changes I see at Wikipedia...including the existence of the FA-Team...are going to be very attractive to academicians. I just got a pleasant reply from someone at Rice University, who expressed interest but asked me what a "Wikipedian" was and how I could verify that I was one, and I sent this back, I'd appreciate feedback of all kinds:
[begin] I'm not offended at all, in fact I'm glad you asked. Wikipedia is a lot like France right after the French Revolution...everyone takes great pride in not taking any pride and just calling themselves a citizen :) My username is Dank55, and if you click on the "history" and "discussion" tabs at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot, you'll see I have a long history of commenting on and changing the article. You're welcome to visit my userpage at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dank55. If you are looking for any particular type of confirmation, I'll be happy to oblige.
Btw, big things are happening at Wikipedia. We've known for years that there are several things that academicians really want that they haven't gotten from Wikipedia...and that has been partly intentional, I think we were afraid of being pushed around by people smarter than us :)...but many things are changing this year: 1. There seems to be strong support now for a feature that's currently on the German Wikipedia, where all non-logged-in users and some logged-in users won't see vandalized pages in general, they will only see pages that have been "checked", and this may overcome the objection we have sometimes heard from academicians that Wikipedia requires them to "babysit" their contributions. 2. We are working very hard to increase the quality on enough articles so that we can start distributing a printed version of "the best of Wikipedia", probably next year. 3. We have a lot of volunteers now working with academicians to get them up to speed on all aspects of Wikipedia.
If you know content experts (of any kind) who are interested in writing articles but have found Wikipedia a "turn-off", please send them my way, and I'll be happy to answer questions and point them to likely colleagues on Wikipedia.
Dan - Dan Dank55 ( talk)( mistakes) 03:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm dark on the idea of offering some kind of service to intending nominators: they will come to rely on it. The whole point of the FA process is to encourage the kind of collaborations that will produce FA standards, and a drive-by wash-as-you-watch car-cleaning service will discourage collaborations.
What would be useful is a register of copy-editors along the lines of LOCE. I don't think a list needs to be content-related, since the nominators are presumably the content experts. When they get to the FAC room, their problems are typically process-related, and don't rely on knowledge of a particular area.
It might be good to have a list of reviewers; unsure. Reviewers need to be rewarded for their efforts somehow.
Aside from that, I can only say that the process will just bumble through as it has done for years, but that we should feel pleased that significantly higher standards are (mostly) enforced compared with even a year or two ago. Tony (talk) 11:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I must say I used to proclaim loudly that editing a pile of text was better than starting from scratch, however I may have to eat my words with White-winged Fairy-wren..in any case loads of people have been helpful and I think it is more polished now. I promise I will do more serious articles after this...well maybe not straightaway but I'll get Bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder to FAC sometime this year. Cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 10:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Textual criticism.
The help of good copy-editors is much needed. This is a complex subject that needs the caring hand of editors that can make a complex subject to be readable as per the comments made in the bottom of that FA review. Thank you in advance for your consideration. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
...is now at FAC. Budding Journalist 15:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
On a related note, Everglades is at Peer Review. It is the longest article I've contributed to at 63k (readable prose). With the four satellite articles, I have placed them simultaneously at PR and GA, but I think this one needs extra help before it goes to GA. My concern is that its length and detail are too overwhelming, much the way that I can't seem to get through the lead of Roman Catholic Church. I'm asking anyone who has a spare moment to read through and give suggestions. Thank you. -- Moni3 ( talk) 15:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Just wanted to let everyone know King Arthur is a featured article as of yesterday. -- Meldshal (talk to me) 13:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
There is another teaching assignment that is ending soon (July 21 I believe), where the teacher is trying to get her students to make five articles up to GA status. You could always help out with this, but I'm afraid more help may be needed than the MMM project. The project page is here - User:Piotrus/Teaching assignment. Remember ( talk) 12:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
After innocently adding my name to the list of participants, according to the house style, I noticed to my horror that the project page was rife with (children: avert your eyes) spaced em dashes. I can only conclude that this project is a subtle attempt by existing FA owners to ensure well-referenced FA candidates fail for MOS-compliance. Fie, for shame! Skomorokh 03:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Just notifying everyone. -- Meldshal (§peak to me) 13:41, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Here. Further help with Scattered disc and Solar energy would be much appreciated. Geometry guy 21:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Let me offer to you our information booklet, which we edited on the Czech Wikiproject Quality: w:cs:Wikipedie:WikiProjekt Kvalita/brožura. The summary is in English languege. You can also translate it whole, using Google translate. PDF version is being under processed, within few days. Any articles, ideas, opinions are welcome (even in English) for the next volume here.-- Juan de Vojníkov ( talk) 21:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I have been working on Tourism in the United States, and all the content there at the moment was written by myself. Its obviously an incomplete piece of work, but it seems like an ideal project for the FA-Team. I didn't add a proposal because it seems the project focuses on groups of articles. At any rate, I think some sort of collaboration could bring this article to FA status eventually. — Wackymacs ( talk ~ edits) 12:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
If anyone is interested in classical music - December 22, 2008 will mark the 200 anniversary of the first performance of Beethoven's fifth symphony. The article is currently a A-class article, but it would be nice to get it up to FA status and put on the main page for the 200 year anniversary. Remember ( talk) 16:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
We need fact checkers! Please help us out! Thanks! Awadewit ( talk) 14:28, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I'm wondering if members of this project might have time to help copyediting Alien (film). It's currently at FAC and some concerns about prose have been brought up. I've gone over Tony's guides but I feel I am too close to the text (being the primary contributor) to be able to take an objective eye and work out the kinks. Jappalang recommended that I contact this project, so I'm hoping that one or more members might have time to lend an eye to the article. Thanks very much for your consideration. -- IllaZilla ( talk) 23:32, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
I've been working on this article and would like to recieve some suggestions on how to improve this article for a FA nomination. Thanks! Shinerunner ( talk) 01:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
My message is not related to Featured Articles, but please bear with me. I'll be brief.
Tim Vickers, whom many of you may know, and I are giving a hands-on workshop in creating scientific articles for Wikipedia at the upcoming meeting of the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB) in San Francisco. The workshop will take place on December 16th for two hours, from 12:30–2:30pm local time, which is 20:30–22:30 UTC (Wikipedia time). We're expecting roughly 60 newbie scientists, who will be eager to start articles and upload images for their favorite research topics. We're hoping that you will consider volunteering to help the scientists to craft these new articles and give them a good impression of how Wikipedians can pull together for a common cause. This seems like a great opportunity to build bridges with academics, and if we're successful, other invitations from scientific bodies will likely follow. I know this to be the home of many excellent and helpful editors. Please write us to volunteer to help; we'll keep you posted, individually, on the workshop and how it will run. Thanks! Proteins ( talk) 23:07, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your support, Dan! I hope that the scientists will work on their articles after the workshop, and eventually bring them to GAN and FAC. Tim and I and the other workshop volunteers will be trying to inspire them. If you (or anyone else here) happened to be available during the workshop hours to help out, that would be much appreciated as well. BTW, thanks for volunteering to test my MOS:HEAD-checking script; your feedback will be very helpful. I'm planning on adding other MoS checks once the present script seems OK. Suggestions/requests for other useful programs are always welcome, Proteins ( talk) 12:40, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello FA Team!
I am a student from WikiProject AP Biology 2008, and it is my mission to get the North American River Otter article to FA status. Anybody willing to join in on the fun is more than welcome to, as I always welcome assistance and support with open arms.
Best regards, -- Wikitrevor ( talk) 22:31, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
-- Wikitrevor ( talk) 17:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
There is a plan to bring the Oil shale extraction article to FA status and renominate it for FAC. Any assistance, such as reviewing and editing, as also as any critical comment is appreciated. Beagel ( talk) 10:59, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
I tagged the WikiProject FA page dead a while back, and that doesn't seem to have been controversial. Although this message might be better suited there, no one watches that page, and it would likely have gone unnoticed.
I propose doing something to reincarnate this project, because we had a beautiful thing going. As I recall, this was supposed to help new users with expertise in a particular subject area but no familiarity with FAC and whatnot get their article promoted. I want to try the exact opposite, experienced editors with little knowledge of a subject trying to achieve an FA. Although this might seem a bit silly, I also propose we do it in a neglected subject area—I'm thinking food. Only nine FAs are in the food and drink category, and just three of those are on actual dishes. I've figured that if a model was written, more users would write about the subject. I completely open to the article suggestions, but just to throw some out, pasta, caesar salad, french fries, etc. And suggestions (or requests for me to leave this page and never come back) are welcome. Cheers, Mm40 ( talk) 04:45, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
Addendum: message left at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink asking for food-smart editors. Mm40 ( talk) 14:29, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
I was able to recruit quite a few FA members to do a bit of work on Operation Schadenfreude. There's always the option to help finish off that push as well. Mkdw talk 02:46, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
It's a big job, but a worthwhile one. Details at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine/Google Project. -- Arcadian ( talk) 14:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC)