Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/XVII Tranche Project Audit/Academy

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Process stalled due to less hands and low participation. KCVelaga (talk) 17:10, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Instructions

[edit]

This page is for tracking the audit of Academy pages. Please add sections for each Academy page in the order they appear within the Academy. The section heading is to also include a status of the audit for the individual page using one of the following parameters:

  • Pending
  • Reviewing
  • Reviewed
  • Checked
  • Closed
  • Reopened

By this, the TOC of this page becomes a summary of progress.

Within the section here for each page, create sub-sections for "Comments" and "Progress" as each of these arise.

Create a section on the particular talk page of each "topic" within in the Academy with the heading, "Audit". This main heading will, more-or-less, follow the structure here. It will record general discussion. It will separately record any discussion in closing the audit review. The only specific requirement is that the "close" is clearly documented.

Comments

[edit]

The purpose of the comments section is to notify issues that arise which may affect one or more of the Academy's pages. It is also to "flag" a discussion at a particular page that may require broader participation. However, such discussions should be conducted on the talk page for the particular "topic".

Progress

[edit]

This section has several functions.

  • Track the progress of the audit process in more detail than indicated by the heading.
  • Provide a summary of the auditable trail of the process and who has completed each step of the process.
  • Request an editor action the next step in the process.
  • Record that that a request is being actioned. This is important to avoid duplicate effort.
  • Record that an action has occurred.

Each step is indicated by a key word shown in "bold face" and signed by the editor recording the step per the following example. Edit summaries should use the key words indicated.

  • Reviewing A user is reviewing a page
  • Check A user is requesting a check of a review (the section heading shows that the page has been reviewed).
  • Checking A user records that they are responding to a request to check.
  • Closed If the checking user is satisfied that with the actions taken in review of the page, the review is closed.
  • Close If the checker or reviewer requests a third-party close.
  • Closing When a user responds to a request to close.
  • Reopened As a result of an issue being identified in the course of reviewing another page. A brief description should accompany this (perhaps, with links to the talk page sections where this is raised). A reopend review needs to be closed by a similar process.

The closer and checker should add their own signatures; however, a third party may add signatures copied from the "topics" talk page, with a note that these have been added and signed by the "adder".

Audit process

[edit]

The process for auditing the "topic" pages is as follows :

  1. Advise the project (on the project talk page) of the review in general. Invite comments in general at the Academy review talk page and specifically at "topic" talk pages. Make it clear that this will be a longish process and that all input will be considered. Periodically readvertise as topics are coming up for review. This step may not have occurred in the early stages of planning the audit process. A "close" in such a case does not preclude revisting a "topic" in light of concerns being raised by members of the project.
  2. An editor uninvolved with the topics creation reviews and copy edits the page. This person becomes the "reviewer" in the following process. Their role is much like the nominator in any other review process.
  3. Any "significant" issues are notified at the "Academy review talk page" for resolution.
  4. The reviewer proposes the topic page for checking at the "Academy review talk page".
  5. A "checker" checks the work of the reviewer for accuracy, typos content etc. They fix minor matters and make a recommendation. If there are no unresolved issues, the checker may close the review.
  6. In the event of unresolved issues, a "closer" may be called upon (per the Academy review talk page) to provide a third opinion and, having resolved the issue, close the review.
  7. In the course of reviewing a topic page, changes to a "previously" reviewed page may be indicated (by the "identifier"). These will not be simple typos. They may entail a change in terminology or something more complex. Where this occurs, there must be concurrence of the ""identifier" and a seconder familiar with the implications of the change at the "previous" page. The matter may be simply resolved. If it is not, the "previous" pages may need to be reviewed anew to resolve the matter. This is becomes an iterative process. The issue and its resolution should be documented on the "previous" topics talk page. It should be linked to the topic that gave rise to the issue and provide an "auditable trail" of what has transpired.

The underlying principle is that, changes to project documentation are not the consequence of one persons actions alone, that changes can be validated and that there is an "auditable trail" to substantiate the validation. The steps in the process link directly to the progress for each "topic" page.

Overview – closed

[edit]

Asking for help – closed

[edit]

Improving articles – closed

[edit]

Citations and references – closed

[edit]

Comments

[edit]

There is a question of how we refer to other pages that make up the Academy. There are a few options: article, page, topic, unit or module. Some are better than others. Most have a degree of potential ambiguity - are we talking about an encyclopedic article or an Academy article; a military unit or a unit of the Academy. In writing, using such terms, we would need to be explicit and this could get cumbersome. "Module" appears to be the choice based on least potential ambiguity. Can we get a consensus on what the term should be please. This will potentially affect the whole Academy - at least to the extent that one module refers to another. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 01:51, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Running with module - see some discussion at talk page.Cinderella157 (talk) 11:48, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Using statistics – reviewing

[edit]
@Cinderella157: Reminder. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 06:39, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Cinderella157: Reminder. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:05, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, I have been diverted by some RW issues. If you wish to alter the status, this is fine with me. Alternatively, having taken it on, I will complete the task. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 11:35, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Cinderella157: No issues, please continue the review. I just wanted to hear from you on this. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:38, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Cinderella157: Reminder. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 03:36, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Cinderella157: Hi, please let know your stand on this as well. KCVelaga (talk) 15:11, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Academy/Using statistics for questions of grammar. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 02:29, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Understanding talk page templates – closed

[edit]

How to use the Milhist template – closed

[edit]
[edit]

Departments of the Military history Project – closed

[edit]

Deleting an article – closed

[edit]

Copy-editing essentials – closed

[edit]
Jonesey's on wikibreak until tomorrow. I'll get to it ASAP. All the best, Miniapolis 15:01, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Using infobox templates – closed

[edit]

Plagiarism and how to avoid it – closed

[edit]

Writing a good stub – closed

[edit]

Writing an effective article introduction – closed

[edit]

Are images important? – closed

[edit]

Using external media – closed

[edit]

What do Milhist task forces do? – closed

[edit]

Reviewing articles – closed

[edit]

Wikignoming – closed

[edit]

Pop culture sections – check

[edit]

Barnstars, Awards, and Honorable Mentions – closed

[edit]

Understanding the terrain – closed

[edit]

Using different reference formats – reviewing

[edit]

When to use sections – closed

[edit]

How can I help the project? – closed

[edit]

Frustration and disappointment – closed

[edit]

Opportunities for new military history articles – closed

[edit]

Retirement and departure – closed

[edit]
[edit]

Understanding Page Protection – closed

[edit]

Working with categories – closed

[edit]

Are style guides set in stone? – closed

[edit]

Unit names, ranks and abbreviations – closed

[edit]

Writing an Order of Battle – pending

[edit]

How to prepare an A-Class Review – check

[edit]

Participating in working groups – closed

[edit]

Writing an A-Class article – closed

[edit]

Writing a featured article – closed

[edit]

Writing a large-scope article – check

[edit]

Working with foreign-language sources – check

[edit]

Working with translations – check

[edit]

Using the A-class review toolbox – closed

[edit]

Performing an A-Class review – check

[edit]

NPOV images – check

[edit]

Maximising the use of public domain government image collections – check

[edit]

Reviewing good articles – closed

[edit]

Working with non-free content images – check

[edit]

Maintaining articles – check

[edit]

Today's Featured Article requests – check

[edit]
[edit]

Initiating a featured article review – check

[edit]

The effect of aging sources – check

[edit]

Featured article criteria 1c – check

[edit]

Filing a Freedom of Information Request in the United States – closed

[edit]

Obtaining images – check

[edit]

Image restoration – pending

[edit]

Creating maps – pending

[edit]

Working with sounds – pending

[edit]

Using declassified documents – check

[edit]

A-class checklist – check

[edit]
[edit]

Creating and maintaining "Black Project" articles – check

[edit]

For students and teachers: How to use Wikipedia in a learning environment – closed

[edit]

Nomenclature for the Eastern Front of World War II or the Great Patriotic War – pending

[edit]

Becoming a coordinator – closed

[edit]

Advice from former coordinators – closed

[edit]

Setting up drives – closed

[edit]

Closing an A-Class review – closed

[edit]

Establishing coordinator election pages – check

[edit]

Using MassMessage for Project Notification – closed

[edit]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Coordinators/XVII_Tranche_Project_Audit/Academy&oldid=892602570"