Are individual editors supposed to calculate the 50% bonus for old articles when updating stats, or will this be done at the end? Thanks in advance. Philg88 ♦ talk 05:38, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I am thinking that Sardinian banditry (5851 words) has excessive detail, and I am considering doing extensive cuts, as I did in May 2014 on the article Kutch Gurjar Kshatriyas contributions to the Indian railways. I have added this article to my working list, and tagged it as being copyedited. Please take a look and tell me what you think.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 01:22, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello Wikipedians! I will be taking a short wikibreak due to family issues. Is anyone willing to update the leaderboard while I'm on my wikibreak? Cheers! Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 13:38, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
We have almost cleared the 166 articles in the two target months, and the month/drive is not even halfway over! Great work, everyone.
Can we try to clear out May 2013, and maybe even June 2013, before the end of the month? That would leave us with only 13 months in our backlog, down from 17 months at the beginning of the drive. I think we can do it, or at least come very close.
We are also only about 40 articles away from 2,236 articles, our lowest backlog total ever. We can definitely get below that number if we keep on editing at the current pace. (We have to edit more than 40 articles, since about 150–200 articles will be tagged for copy editing during the rest of this month.) – Jonesey95 ( talk) 04:48, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
( ←) So when I update the progress chart (midnight UTC is early evening where I live), should I should add May to the old-articles parameter or will that mess us up? Mini apolis 18:39, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
I've removed the Drive articles list section created by Carriearchdale because she's been indef blocked per this diff, and thus can't participate in it. If that's not acceptable, please feel free to revert my edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 ( talk) 04:07, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Attention all July 2014 drive participants: per the coordinators' consensus above, May 2013 has been added to the "old articles" list for this drive. That means that if you copy-edit an article tagged in May 2013, you should add *O after the word count in your complete article list, and you will receive a 50% word count bonus for that article.
Keep up the great work! Your GOCE lead coordinator, – Jonesey95 ( talk) 02:49, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow copyeditors. There have been new articles that popped up as August 2012. The August article has already been copyedited (by me.), and the tag was added in August, then the tag was removed (I think), then it was re-added. I put *O, but should I change it? The article was called Farum Cats Australsk Fodboldklub. Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 13:03, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi all, Curious about others' standards for what constitutes copyediting an article, I've been glancing through some of the copy edits done this month. Suffice it to say, there are dramatic differences in the number of issues remaining after editors are done with an article. Although we do have a formal review process in place, the one person who has signed up to review this drive has not made any edits to Wikipedia since the 4th, and no articles have been reviewed. I would volunteer to be a reviewer, but as someone who is "competing" for barnstars this month, my opinions might be seen as biased. Perhaps an experienced editor would be willing to step up?
More generally, I feel like it would be helpful to be clearer about what constitutes an "acceptable standard". The main drive page tells us: "No rubber-stamping of articles. Be thorough and complete in your copy edits, and make sure all the i's are dotted and the t's crossed. The prose in copy edited articles should comply with the Manual of Style and be free of grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors." Even the best of editors, of course, won't produce text completely free of errors, so what do other editors consider "acceptable"? Has there been a discussion on this before? The many pages of the GOCE mean there are also many talk pages, and it is hard to search through them all. Cheers, Tdslk ( talk) 19:29, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
My effort so far on the July drive has been the addition of {{GOCEreviewed|user=Dthomsen8|date=July 2014|issues=Awaiting deletion results before copyediting}} on the talk pages of articles with PROD or AfD tag. Articles go in Category:Articles reviewed by the Guild of Copy Editors and disappear from the category if actually deleted. Perhaps the GOCEreviewed tag may be deleted for other reasons by editors who see it and realize it should go, and a copyedit tag placed on the article. Currently there are 831 articles in the category.
My suggestion is an August effort to look over those articles and change them into active copyedit tags where appropriate. Yes, I understand that this will add to our backlog, but at least some of these articles are worthy of our efforts. Perhaps we could place them in a different category from our usual backlog, and count them differently (maybe extra credit?) in the next blitzes or drives. What do you think? -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 19:11, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Good work, User:Philg88. Does adding the date mean that there will be separate subcategories by date, just like the copyediting categories? Will the existing articles have {{ GOCE pending}}. DThomsen8 ( talk) 09:57, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
The July copy editing drive ends in one hour. Please make any final edits to your article lists and the leaderboard (it is not updated automatically) in the next 12 hours or so. It is OK to edit your section of the page, and the leaderboard, even though the page is archived and says not to edit it.
Barnstars will be distributed in the next few days. Thanks to everyone who participated. We hit a new record low for our backlog count and nearly cleared out three months of articles! – Jonesey95 ( talk) 22:57, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I just checked some of 001Jrm's stated word counts whilst checking the leaderboard. I've found at least two that are over-inflated; List of ninja video games stated at 13,457 was 6,075 when I copy-pasted into M$ Word (the list includes tables); that's being generous because I left in the section titles, and lists we normally ignore, etc. Levett, claimed at 11,536 came out at 4,495 using the Word method and excluding refs. The WP tool shows 1,686 for the same article.
I'm assuming s/he has somehow got the wrong idea about the page size tool, or about copy-pasting into a word processor. Meanwhile I'll check a few more and amend his/her word counts; I'll also notify him/her of this conversation. Meanwhile I'm tired and I'll take this up tomorrow. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 ( talk) 03:06, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Are individual editors supposed to calculate the 50% bonus for old articles when updating stats, or will this be done at the end? Thanks in advance. Philg88 ♦ talk 05:38, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
I am thinking that Sardinian banditry (5851 words) has excessive detail, and I am considering doing extensive cuts, as I did in May 2014 on the article Kutch Gurjar Kshatriyas contributions to the Indian railways. I have added this article to my working list, and tagged it as being copyedited. Please take a look and tell me what you think.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 01:22, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello Wikipedians! I will be taking a short wikibreak due to family issues. Is anyone willing to update the leaderboard while I'm on my wikibreak? Cheers! Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 13:38, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
We have almost cleared the 166 articles in the two target months, and the month/drive is not even halfway over! Great work, everyone.
Can we try to clear out May 2013, and maybe even June 2013, before the end of the month? That would leave us with only 13 months in our backlog, down from 17 months at the beginning of the drive. I think we can do it, or at least come very close.
We are also only about 40 articles away from 2,236 articles, our lowest backlog total ever. We can definitely get below that number if we keep on editing at the current pace. (We have to edit more than 40 articles, since about 150–200 articles will be tagged for copy editing during the rest of this month.) – Jonesey95 ( talk) 04:48, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
( ←) So when I update the progress chart (midnight UTC is early evening where I live), should I should add May to the old-articles parameter or will that mess us up? Mini apolis 18:39, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
I've removed the Drive articles list section created by Carriearchdale because she's been indef blocked per this diff, and thus can't participate in it. If that's not acceptable, please feel free to revert my edit. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 ( talk) 04:07, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Attention all July 2014 drive participants: per the coordinators' consensus above, May 2013 has been added to the "old articles" list for this drive. That means that if you copy-edit an article tagged in May 2013, you should add *O after the word count in your complete article list, and you will receive a 50% word count bonus for that article.
Keep up the great work! Your GOCE lead coordinator, – Jonesey95 ( talk) 02:49, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow copyeditors. There have been new articles that popped up as August 2012. The August article has already been copyedited (by me.), and the tag was added in August, then the tag was removed (I think), then it was re-added. I put *O, but should I change it? The article was called Farum Cats Australsk Fodboldklub. Brandon (MrWooHoo) • Talk to Brandon! 13:03, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi all, Curious about others' standards for what constitutes copyediting an article, I've been glancing through some of the copy edits done this month. Suffice it to say, there are dramatic differences in the number of issues remaining after editors are done with an article. Although we do have a formal review process in place, the one person who has signed up to review this drive has not made any edits to Wikipedia since the 4th, and no articles have been reviewed. I would volunteer to be a reviewer, but as someone who is "competing" for barnstars this month, my opinions might be seen as biased. Perhaps an experienced editor would be willing to step up?
More generally, I feel like it would be helpful to be clearer about what constitutes an "acceptable standard". The main drive page tells us: "No rubber-stamping of articles. Be thorough and complete in your copy edits, and make sure all the i's are dotted and the t's crossed. The prose in copy edited articles should comply with the Manual of Style and be free of grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors." Even the best of editors, of course, won't produce text completely free of errors, so what do other editors consider "acceptable"? Has there been a discussion on this before? The many pages of the GOCE mean there are also many talk pages, and it is hard to search through them all. Cheers, Tdslk ( talk) 19:29, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
My effort so far on the July drive has been the addition of {{GOCEreviewed|user=Dthomsen8|date=July 2014|issues=Awaiting deletion results before copyediting}} on the talk pages of articles with PROD or AfD tag. Articles go in Category:Articles reviewed by the Guild of Copy Editors and disappear from the category if actually deleted. Perhaps the GOCEreviewed tag may be deleted for other reasons by editors who see it and realize it should go, and a copyedit tag placed on the article. Currently there are 831 articles in the category.
My suggestion is an August effort to look over those articles and change them into active copyedit tags where appropriate. Yes, I understand that this will add to our backlog, but at least some of these articles are worthy of our efforts. Perhaps we could place them in a different category from our usual backlog, and count them differently (maybe extra credit?) in the next blitzes or drives. What do you think? -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 19:11, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Good work, User:Philg88. Does adding the date mean that there will be separate subcategories by date, just like the copyediting categories? Will the existing articles have {{ GOCE pending}}. DThomsen8 ( talk) 09:57, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
The July copy editing drive ends in one hour. Please make any final edits to your article lists and the leaderboard (it is not updated automatically) in the next 12 hours or so. It is OK to edit your section of the page, and the leaderboard, even though the page is archived and says not to edit it.
Barnstars will be distributed in the next few days. Thanks to everyone who participated. We hit a new record low for our backlog count and nearly cleared out three months of articles! – Jonesey95 ( talk) 22:57, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I just checked some of 001Jrm's stated word counts whilst checking the leaderboard. I've found at least two that are over-inflated; List of ninja video games stated at 13,457 was 6,075 when I copy-pasted into M$ Word (the list includes tables); that's being generous because I left in the section titles, and lists we normally ignore, etc. Levett, claimed at 11,536 came out at 4,495 using the Word method and excluding refs. The WP tool shows 1,686 for the same article.
I'm assuming s/he has somehow got the wrong idea about the page size tool, or about copy-pasting into a word processor. Meanwhile I'll check a few more and amend his/her word counts; I'll also notify him/her of this conversation. Meanwhile I'm tired and I'll take this up tomorrow. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 ( talk) 03:06, 1 August 2014 (UTC)