Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/H5N1

H5N1

Original suggestions for cleanup

This article could become a major event as time passes, but the information that's there now is poorly organized and is outdated.

Most of the article needs to be updated; several sections discuss what happened as of July 2005.
Instead of reading like an article, it reads like a timeline - people probably just added a paragraph whenever something important happened. The history section is far too long compared to actual information about the disease.
There are no images in this article, and the table with cases and fatalities needs to be updated.
Government preparations for such an outbreak, if it occurs, might be a useful subtopic.

--Quintin3265 18:08, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merge attempt and revert discussion

I made an attempt to merge this article into Avian influenza. Please let me know if I was out of line or did a bad job of it. Cheers - Her Pegship 17:45, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My edits have been reverted, so obviously someone thought I was or I did. *sigh* Her Pegship 18:34, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am the reverter and just became aware that this discussion was going on. I have been editing from the avian influenza article for a bit and can give you an update from that perspective. The network of influenza articles had serious organizational issues because of some definitional issues about what should be a subpage of what. I spent some time clarifying article hierarchies, e.g. Influenza --> Avian influenza (--> Swine flu) --> H1N1 --> Spanish flu, wrestling the redirects into shape and breaking the relevant information from avian influenza into influenza pandemic. The last bullet point by Quintin3265 above may be best addressed at influenza pandemic as most of the preparations are not specific to the H5N1 substrain, but are general to all influenza. There is clearly enough information on H5N1 to make its own subpage (though an aggressive editor needs to take the proverbial chainsaw and jackhammer to it, in my opinion), and attempts to merge its content into avian influenza don't help either article. Thanks, Banyan Tree 19:43, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Is there a way to mark an article or talk page so that users can tell someone is already doing an overhaul on it? I read the comments on the talk page before editing, but the message I got was that the article "needed work", "was a huge mess", and people "didn't have the time" to work on it. Part of the difficulty is that the talk page itself is fragmented under various headings, so I may have missed something while reading non-sequential comments. Her Pegship 20:04, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for continuing the off-topic discussion, but thought I'd mention that there is a {{Under construction}} but it probably wasn't applicable as I had finished my structural edits. This would have been obvious in a less trafficked article's history, but all my "major structural change" edit summaries had been pushed far down in the history from the constant editing. Cheers, Banyan Tree 02:20, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I archived everything and put a link to here. That should put everything in one place until the cleanup is done. --Quintin3265 22:04, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm - well, that attempt was (rather rudely, I might add) reverted. I could revert back, but it's not worth the time. So much for getting everything in one place... --Quintin3265 15:36, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Taskforce assignment

Added to User:Knowledge Seeker/Desk RJFJR 00:50, 12 October 2005 (UTC) no longer participant[reply]

Added to User:Jfurr1981/Desk RJFJR 03:55, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It has been marked as a good article and the taskforce template removed so I am closing this article. RJFJR 16:09, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]