User talk:Miniapolis/Archives/2021/May
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Administrators' newsletter – May 2021
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).
Interface administrator changes
- Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
- The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.
- The user group
oversight
will be renamed tosuppress
. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.
- The user group
- The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.
Buffalo, New York
[edit]Good afternoon,
I see that you're in the Guild of Copy Editors and also in WikiProject Western New York. I'm just letting you know that I've started doing research and editing for the article and am attempting to bring it up to at least GA status, with a future goal of FA status. If you have any thoughts please let me know. Buffaboy talk 19:25, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- Looks like it's very close to GA standards now; I changed the {{Main list}} tag in the "Notable people" section, since the only list is the link. One issue may be the number of images and their placement; I saw several text sandwiches, one of which was left-aligned and pushed a section header to the middle of the page. Although you're copyediting the article, let me know if you want help with that (or moving the images around). Stay well and all the best, Miniapolis 19:53, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks! Buffaboy talk 20:19, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Discontent Content Issue 3
[edit]Welcome, subscribers, to the third Discontent Content newsletter! Discontent Content is a newsletter aiming to collate and improve Wikipedia articles in need of more eyes and hands to get them in shape. Its unique trimodal structure allows editors to work where they feel comfortable -- with stubs and starts needing to be brought to standard, mid-quality articles with Good or Featured potential, or quality-assessed articles needing help to maintain their status. Articles in this category are those that need to be brought up to a minimum quality standard. Some will be stubs; others will be longer articles that nonetheless have significant concerns putting them far below B- or C-class adequacy. This issue's Category 1 articles are:
Articles in this category, while in better current shape than Category 1, are still missing something. They have the potential to be truly high-quality content, and may have been at one point. With work, they can be brought up to dizzying heights. This issue's Category 2 articles are:
Articles in this category have been assessed through a content review process in the past, but may require work to be brought up to current GA/FA standard. Editors can help bring them to a level where the star or plus near their names can once again shine. This issue's Category 3 articles are:
This issue's subscriber suggestion, again from BOZ, is:
This is ridiculously late, and I apologise -- I've been writing articles :) I've also, excitingly, landed a couple 'real publishing' writing gigs, which I'll be plenty excited to talk about when they're published. Due to the current increased amount of writing I have to do on a regular basis both on- and off-wiki, I'm planning to drop this down to monthly so I can spread out my responsibilities a bit. |
Discontent Content Issue 4
[edit]Welcome, subscribers, to the fourth Discontent Content newsletter! Discontent Content is a newsletter aiming to collate and improve Wikipedia articles in need of more eyes and hands to get them in shape. Its unique trimodal structure allows editors to work where they feel comfortable -- with stubs and starts needing to be brought to standard, mid-quality articles with Good or Featured potential, or quality-assessed articles needing help to maintain their status. Articles in this category are those that need to be brought up to a minimum quality standard. Some will be stubs; others will be longer articles that nonetheless have significant concerns putting them far below B- or C-class adequacy. This issue's Category 1 articles are:
Articles in this category, while in better current shape than Category 1, are still missing something. They have the potential to be truly high-quality content, and may have been at one point. With work, they can be brought up to dizzying heights. This issue's Category 2 articles are:
Articles in this category have been assessed through a content review process in the past, but may require work to be brought up to current GA/FA standard. Editors can help bring them to a level where the star or plus near their names can once again shine. This issue's Category 3 articles are:
This issue's reader suggestion is brought to you by Sennecaster:
Yes, I know I said I was going to switch to monthly. Let's just go "Vat doesn't really Get Time" and run with it. The Core Contest is on its last day of entries, and I've picked articles here with an eye to that. It's the first time it's running since 2017, and I for one am looking forward to overhauling Prehistoric religion. If you feel inspired by anything here, get in there quick! |