This is an archive of past discussions with User:SMcCandlish. 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.

←

→

June 2008

New defaultsort debate

Resolved

– Just an FYI.

As you commented in an old disucssion here, I thought this TfD might be of interest. Carcharoth (talk) 16:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I will definitely look into it. I'm really tired of various templates (Template:WPBIO, etc.) redundantly forcing editors to re-enter the DEFAULTSORT information. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Darn, I missed it. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what

Resolved

– Just an FYI

Hi Stanton, in response to the question you posed here over a year ago, the correct spelling is "je ne sais quoi". It seems it hasn't been brought up your talk page yet. Just thought I'd let you know. Oliphaunt (talk) 09:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'd forgotten. :-) — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 06:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:WikiProject Video Games

Resolved

– Just an FYI.

Template:WikiProject Video Games has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. MrKIA11 (talk) 17:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Noted. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:35, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good articles newsletter

Resolved

– Just projectspam, and I did artchive.

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter
Volume I, No. 8 - June 2008

May issue | July issue

Project News

There are currently 4,266 Good Articles listed at WP:GA.

The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 157 unreviewed articles. Out of 215 total nominations, 44 are on hold, 13 are under review, and one is seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance!

The oldest unreviewed articles are: Choctaw, One Night Stand (2007), Justin Tuck, Tristan Tzara, The Stake Out (Seinfeld episode), Impalement arts, Backlash (2007), Adelaide Rams, and Sam Cowan.

The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (31), Sports and recreation (31), Transport (24), Music (13), and Art and architecture (11)

The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 4 articles up for re-review.

GA Sweeps Update

The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of May, a total of 82 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 71 were found to continue to meet the GA criteria, and 11 were delisted. There are currently 15 articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions.

We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and criteria. If you are interested, please contact OhanaUnited for details.

GAN Reviewer of the Month

Giggy (talk · contribs) (a.k.a. Dihydrogen Monoxide (talk · contribs)) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for May, based on the assessments made by Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Giggy had a whopping 45 reviews during the month of May! Congratulations to Giggy (talk · contribs) on being May's GAN Reviewer of the Month!

Other outstanding reviewers during the month of May include:

Also, with 19 nominations, Mitchazenia (talk · contribs) is the nominator of the month, followed by TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) with 8 nominations submitted.

Member News

There are now 216 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 6 new members that joined during the month of April:

Jack Bethune (talk · contribs)
Jordan Timothy James Busson (talk · contribs)
Limetolime (talk · contribs)
Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim Fan (talk · contribs)
Mm40 (talk · contribs)
Redmarkviolinist (talk · contribs)

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!

New GA Review Process - Review Subpages

In case you haven't noticed, we initiated a new process for GA Reviews at the end of last month. The {{GA nominee}} template was modified to direct new reviews initiated on an article to begin on a subpage of article talkspace (e.g. [[Talk:Article/GA#]], where '#' is the current number of GA reviews conducted for the article, incremented automatically, starting with 1). The primary reason for this change is to address some concerns made by several Wikipedians that previous GA reviews are not easily accessible in archives, the way that featured article reviews and peer reviews are, since the review is conducted on the article's talkspace, instead of in a subpage of the featured article space or peer review space. The reason we opted to move GA reviews to article talkspace (instead of GA space) is to better maintain the personal relationship between editor(s) and reviewer(s) by keeping reviews done in an area where editors can easily access it. Nonetheless, we still desired to have better archiving and maintenance of past reviews, so that GA ultimately becomes more accountable.

When an article is nominated, the nominator adds the template using a substitution, by adding {{subst:GAN|subtopic=<name of subtopic for article at GAN>}}, as well as lists the article (as usual) at WP:GAN in the appropriate category.

When a reviewer initiates a review of an article, all that needs to be done is to read the template on the article's {{GA nominee}} template on its talk page, and click on the link to start the review. When the reviewer clicks on that link, they will also see some instructions on how to start a review of a GAN. For new reviewers, there's also a link to the Good Article criteria, as well as to the Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles page and the mentors list. Once an article is reviewed, the GA review page should be transcluded onto the main article talk page, by adding {{Talk:Article/GA#}} to the bottom of the talk page. This is to ensure maintain the transparency of the GA process, as well as to make editors of the article in question aware that the review is taking place. When an article is either passed or failed, there's really nothing different to do in the process, although reviewers are encouraged to utilize the {{ArticleHistory}} template, linking to the GA review subpage with the 'action#link' parameter.

Did You Know...

... that there are slightly more than twice as many Good Articles (4,266) as there are Featured Articles?
... that Giggy has some really neat and useful tools to assist reviewers in conducting their reviews?
... that there are ten experienced reviewers listed on the GA mentors list that can offer assistance or a second opinion in reviewing articles?

From the Editors

A GA working party has initiated discussion on ways to improve the Good Article project and processes. The goal of the working party is to come up with suggestions for improvement based on recent issues and concerns raised in the past, primarily in the wake of the Great Green Dot Debate of May 2008. The discussion can be found here. Members of the working party include: Dank55 (talk · contribs), Derek.cashman (talk · contribs), EyeSerene (talk · contribs), Giggy (talk · contribs), Gwinva (talk · contribs), LaraLove (talk · contribs), Nehrams2020 (talk · contribs), and OhanaUnited (talk · contribs).

Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue here.

Contributors to this Issue

Dr. Cash (Lead Editor)
Giggabot, Giggy (Distributor)

Improving Wikipedia one article at a time since 2005!

WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia.
Nominations: Atlanta Braves (talk \| history \| start review) • LGBTQ culture in Puerto Vallarta (talk \| history \| start review) • Dick Simpson (politician) (talk \| history \| start review) • Darren Moore (talk \| history \| start review) • Pete Astudillo (talk \| history \| start review) Reassessment: Hurricane Allen • Haile Selassie • Wild Arms (video game) • Hans-Ulrich Rudel • Ben Nevis • The Nightmare • Walt Disney Animation Studios • Kingston upon Hull • USS Texas (BB-35) • Mehmed II's Albanian campaign • Battle of Plataea • Task forces: Project quality • Sweeps • GAN Backlog Drives • GA Cup WikiProject Good articles newsletter (last updated January 2013)
Good article criteria \| Statistics \| GAN Report \| Changes log Nominations list \| edit

Delivered manually due to very large talk page. giggy _(:O) 02:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I need to archive pretty badly. Very busy (out-of-country, actually) right now, though. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 01:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Request for comments

Resolved

– Done.

Hello. I would appreciate your comments here and here. Thank you. Thunderbird2 (talk) 16:12, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I left comments at both subtopics. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 01:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Request

Resolved

– Request effectively declined.

File:TOC template.JPG

TOC preview

I want someone to make a TOC(Tables of content) template for wikipedia like this[1]. If you know how to make, then please put on your effort as it will be good for wikipedia and its users. *The image is an edited one*. I didn't find any template that would break or split the contents into half and put the other half on right side[2]. This template will utilize the blank space and will make the contents table easily accessible without scrolling down. THANKS. Harryroger (talk) 12:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Something to think about. I'm not certain that the MediaWiki templating language is rich enough to actually pull this off as an automated thing; might have to be implemented by the MediaWiki developers. I am traveling for over a month, with very limited Internet access, so I'm not in a position any time soon to look into this. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 01:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Minnesota Fats

Resolved

– Debate was closed by the time I looked at it.

I have nominated Minnesota Fats, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minnesota Fats. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 16:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)