This is an archive of past discussions about User:Miranda. 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.
There are now 3,485 Good Articles listed at WP:GA.
The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 206 unreviewed articles. Out of 251 total nominations, 37 are on hold, 7 are under review, and 1 is seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance!
The top five categories with the largest backlogs are: Sports and recreation (57 articles), Theatre film and drama (34 articles), Music (19 articles), Transport (17 articles), Politics and government (16 articles), World history (13 articles), and Meteorology and atmospheric sciences (13 articles).
If every participant of WikiProject Good Articles could review just one article in the next week, the backlog would be almost eliminated!
GA Sweeps Update
During January, 57 Good Articles were reviewed. Including those articles that were under GAR or on hold, 35 were kept as GA, 20 delisted, 9 currently on hold or at GAR, and 3 were exempted as they are now Featured Articles.
Reviewer of the Month
Ealdgyth is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for January, based on the assessments made by Epbr123 on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Ealdgyth, known in real life as Victoria Short, hails from Central Illinois, and has been editing Wikipedia since May 26, 2007. In this short time, she has made significant contributions to 9 Good Articles, including Baldwin of Exeter and Hubert Walter. Her interests in editing are in the areas of the Middle Ages, History, and horses. Outside of Wikipedia, she is starting her own photography business, and owns three horses. She likes to read science fiction, history, and geneology books. Congratulations to our GAN Reviewer of the Month for January!
Other outstanding reviewers recognized during the month of January include:
This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all!
On Hold versus Failing an Article
This month, I thought I'd focus on a less technical and more of a procedural issue at WP:GAN – determining what the appropriate course of action to take when reviewing an article. Currently, there are four options to decide what to do with an article:
Failing it – it does not meet the criteria; remove the article's listing from WP:GAN and add {{ArticleHistory}} or {{failedGA}} to the article's talk page.
On Hold – The article meets most of the criteria, but might fall short in a few areas; keep it listed at WP:GAN, add #: {{GAOnHold|ArticleName}} ~~~~ below the listing and add {{GAonhold}} to the article's talk page.
Second Opinion – Similar to the on hold option, except an editor is either inexperienced or not knowledgeable enough about a given topic and asks another reviewer to offer another opinion before passing or failing; add #: {{GA2ndopinion|ArticleName}} ~~~~ to WP:GAN below the article's listing and add {{GA2ndoptalk}} to the article's talk page.
So how to you know when an article fails outright, or fails initially, but meets "enough" of the criteria to be placed on hold? The answer to this question probably varies by about the same amount as there are reviewers of Good Articles! Everybody treats this slightly differently. The most important thing to consider is that articles should not be on hold for longer than about one week. Although there is no hard and fast time limit for this, most editors would probably agree that five to seven days is enough time to address any GA-related issues with the article to get it to pass. Some editors have extended this a few days in the past, due to other extenuating circumstances, such as an article's primary editor being very busy with school or work, so they have asked for extra time. But as a general rule, a GA nominee that is placed on hold should meet enough of the criteria to be able to be passed within five to seven days. Some examples of articles that might be placed on hold would be:
the article is mostly complete, but might be missing one topic (subcategory).
minor copyediting is required (needs a few minor manual of style, spelling, or grammatical fixes.
mostly well sourced, but missing maybe a handful of references.
a couple of images need to be tagged with appropriate copyright tags.
On the other hand, an article should be failed if it:
is missing several topic categories, or there are several sections which are very short (1-3 sentences per section).
contains numerous sections which are just lists of information, as opposed to written out as prose.
there's entire sections of text that have no references, or there are a lot of {{cn}} or {{unreferenced}} tags.
has evidence of an active edit war in the article history.
has any {{cleanup}} or other warning tags in various places.
Did You Know...
... that on July 19, 2007, 1,548 good articles that have not been categorized at all were categorized in 15 days?
... that in Chinese Wikipedia, articles need to have at least six net support votes before they are promoted to GA?
... that the English Wikipedia has the most Good Articles, the German Wikipedia has the second most (at over 2000), followed by the Spanish Wikipedia (at over 800), the Chinese Wikipedia (at over 400), and the French Wikipedia (at over 200)?
... that Simple English Wikipedia has zero Good Articles?
... that "Sport and games people" category has the most Good Articles?
... that Virginia Tech massacre (which is now a featured article) was promoted to GA just only about one month after the shooting incident, but took more than seven months to reach FA status?
From the Editors
Originally, I wasn't planning to do "Did you know" other than as a fill-in for Dr. Cash. However, I decided to continue writing this section until I ran out of ideas.
OhanaUnited
Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue here.
For being a quality and efficient editor, both at vandal-fighting and article-writing, and for being a great Wikipedian overall. Acalamari23:17, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject Xbox
I was wondering if you would consider making a moving advertising box for us, like you did for playstation. I was on The Playstation Project and I saw the design you made for them; a very nice design too; and that would be perfect for our page. Please let me know. Regards DJS--DJS24 (talk) 23:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Miranda, thank you so much for the tip about the reference generator that you left at my RfA. I have just redone all the citations on Cannons (house) - what an improvement! Thanks again, kind regards, nancy (talk)08:12, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Can I nominate you for admin. I saw your last nomination and you weren't like that to me when I made a mistake.--Baitt (talk) 18:15, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Might want to take a look at this page and hand out some blocks for sockpuppetry, faking an identity, etc. Please contact me at my userpage on commons (I started the request), not at this IP. 128.118.226.88 (talk) 07:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I was busy last night and saw this. Immediately, I thought "wow, something's wrong here!" Cheers. And have a great day! miranda13:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Alpha Kappa Alpha featured article
Miranda, thanks for your note and congrats on having this be a featured article! You did so much work on it. Glad to contribute.--Parkwells (talk) 14:19, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Yep. Banner ad.
Hi. Can you please make an ad for my WikiProject?
It should say:
Interested in Aquatic Invertebrates?
After that, it says:
Join Wikiproject Aquatic Inverts!
Please use pictures from the project itself.
User:Jourdy288/Wikiproject_Aquatic_Inverts
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:FOLCharmcast.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:FOLCharmcast.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
I saw ur Tips on making Ads. Very helpful. I think it would be nice if you could expand it and make it like a tutorial sort of thing, since this is probably the only resource/help for new admakers.
I was wondering if its possible to create an ad from gif images without using GIMP, which i'm not familiar with. Is it possible to create images on Paint or Photoshop and then put them together? Thanks. T/@Sniperz11editssign13:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
You can try with Paint, but it would look crappy. Probably so in Photoshop. Don't have time to make a tutorial. You may want to contact GIMP developers. Cheers. miranda14:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Since the expletive here is just an intensifier, is it really indispensible? I think omitting just the one word doesn't diminish the word horrifying. / edg☺☭04:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I was kinda suggesting leaving it out. While like many bio subjects MacFarlane may use profanity in casual conversation, I think the memorable phrase collossal dick move should represent just fine. / edg☺☭05:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Please do not tell me you are a red head – 25-35 great looking- and I have just scratched the tip of your personality. And by the way, love the floating tag! Shoessss | Chat 04:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Not done miranda 23:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
