Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Gnome Week

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Helpful

[edit]

I think it would be helpful if 1 or 2 days before the 21st you remind the Signup's list's talk pages about the upcoming event. maybe start divvying out work in a sandbox area and adjusting the loads as more people throw in, then delivering our 'plates' to us the day-of as well would be great; just make sure to have a 'seconds pot' for those who finish up and want more to eat. ;) JoeSmack Talk 06:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the backlogs?

[edit]

Although I think I know my way around much of Wikipedia, I don't really know a lot of the behind-the-scenes stuff. In the How to participate section, backlogs are mentioned, but not linked. Where can these backlogs be found?
— Asch jr. talk to me 09:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prioritising work

[edit]

How about producing a priority list of articles, based on (a) how recently they were last accessed (if this information is available) and (b) how recently they were last changed. If an article is frequently viewed, it's a priority to be fixed. If it's rarely modified, any fixes are likely to remain in place long-term.

Also, AWB has a list of typos that it will correct. Would it be possible to scan WP for all errors that AWB will correct, and then to start with those articles (i.e. the most typo-ridden) that would benefit the most from this relatively effortless method of cleanup? Colonies Chris 12:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Designated days and tagging

[edit]

In view of the Gnome week, would it be ok with everyone if I started clean up tagging articles on random articles, or do you just want to clear the backlog?

Also, might it be an idea to set a daily challenge (copyedit five articles, wikify ten etc.) to give people something to focus on? DevAlt 12:17, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Go ahead and tag. The goal here is to clean up articles, not necessarily to get rid of backlogs. Backlogs are just the measurable goal-oriented aspect. Daily challenges would be great too, and I'll probably give out a barnstar to whoever (legitimately; no rushed jobs or bad work) cleans up the most. Crystallina 17:38, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Vandals

[edit]

Um...I have a rather..depressing (in my opinion) question. If we decide to "popularize" this Gnome Drive, then more and more editors will be joining us, right? And if we put in "Cleanup for Gnome Week..." in the edit summary box, it'll obviously attract the editors who are the patrolling the Recent changes page. All of these are fine, but did it occur to anyone that if a lot of patrollers are busy cleaning up the articles, won't there be a shortage of patrollers? I mean, if 65% of the Recent changes patrollers have gone cleaning up, then only 35% will be patrolling the Recent changes page. And with everybody literally cleaning up the articles, and so little patrollers, they (the patrollers) will be overloaded. They have a whole lot of pages flooding up the Recent changes page. And any vandal can sneak in and start doing very difficult-to-spot vandalisms during the drive. And the overloaded patrollers might just miss them out. If there are still enough to watch out for the recent changes page, then it'll be all right. But suppose it happened? What then? -Zacharycrimsonwolf 08:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you are usually a patroller, I think that you can still be one during Gnome Week. There should be no shortage if everyone does the Gnomish activities they normally do.--Danaman5 15:37, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly don't foresee this being a problem. If somebody does a lot of patrol, they'll probably continue to do a lot of patrol. Besides, I'm fairly sure some of the vandal-patrolling utilities out there allow you to filter Recent Changes. Crystallina 15:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah..well, I took it way more seriously than I thought. Thanks and happy editing! Cheers!! -Zacharycrimsonwolf 11:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats why we got bots.like Martinbot and Anti-vandalbot and Shadowbot there always there :).Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 18:13, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this necessary?

[edit]

How much gnoming could you have done instead of writing this page? I think I must be just missing something, but shouldn't you just be doing this all the time instead of signing up to do it for a week? Atropos 20:51, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Short answer: About as much as you could have done instead of commenting. Long answer: When there's a concerted effort to do something, more gets done. The idea of a team of people working towards a goal is very powerful. And if you have any doubt about my quantity of work outside this project, I invite you to take a look at my contributions. Crystallina 00:06, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unusual way of clearing backlogs...

[edit]

I've discovered looking through the backlogs that a lot of people will reference tag rubbish or nonnotable articles instead of prodding them or taking them to AfD. I have taken to prodding five crap articles that I find a day. I prod anything that:

  1. Contains few or no references, so that notability is unclear.
  2. Is only one sentence long.
  3. Contains nothing but markup and very little content.

I never prod anything that someone has clearly put work into, unless it is abominable/really badly written/a hoax. You may find it would reduce the backlogs rather quickly if everyone on gnome patrol didn't hesitate to prod the naff and unhelpful. 62.30.56.116 21:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC) (Dev920 - couldn't resist)[reply]

[edit]

Anyone have any handy links to the pages with links to disambig, articles needing wikifaction, or anything else that can come in handy for this week? matt91486 05:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • A few:

Running tally

[edit]

Could someone set up a section on the main page where people can add their running totals? (Five articles wikified, 24 categorised, 17 prodded etc.) Once we have an idea of how we're doing we can ask someone arty to knock out some visuals to encourage us. 62.30.56.116 17:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that would be advisable. There are about 80 users who had joined this drive, and by the end of it, more would have joined. Too many edits, the page will be very long. Besides, instead of trying to calculate how many edits you've done in total, you can use the extra time to clear up more articles. Cheers!! -Zacharycrimsonwolf 02:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I created my own subpage here to help me keep a running total - • The Giant Puffin • 10:24, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should we not at least track the backlog fluctuations, see if we're having an effect? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I'm adding missing entries to {{hndis}} pages. I'm seeing a lot of redlink entries on those pages. I've been leaving the redlinks in, but it occurs to me that it might be better to remove them. Opinions? -- Boracay Bill 03:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say remove. I don't think a red link should be anywhere, least of all a disamb page. G1ggy Talk/Contribs 04:46, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • It depends. If there's just a redlink with no other info, delete the item. If the accompanying description suggests something/someone significant enough that someone might write an article about it, then keep the link (and try searching - there's a good chance an article already exists with a slightly different spelling or capitalisation, or with a standard apostrophe rather than a back tick). If it's not significant enough for an article, but still connected to something significant (e.g. a minor character in a well-known book), unlink it. If it's clearly just a vanity entry (common on name disambig pages), delete the item. Colonies Chris 10:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think redlinks are valid; a lot of time, I'll add a disambig link to a professional athlete on a disambig page when that was mistakenly linked to by an article in case someone is looking for him when I don't have time to make the article myself. Then the reference is there so they know he's not completely forgotten about, and there is a start for someone else to make the article. matt91486 20:08, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going through these pages pretty quickly, without spending a lot of time dithering on a link-by-link basis. I've settled into a pattern of quickly deciding whether or not redlink or nonlink hndis page entries are worth retaining (usually based on whether the descriptive info contains links which lead me to suppose someone might have come to the hndis page while actually in search of one of the wikilinked pages in the descriptions. (e.g., Joe redlink witherspoon was a player for the Boston Red Sox baseball team.) I've been grouping redlink and nonlink items which don't pass this subjective test into a commented-out block. -- Boracay Bill 23:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Next year?

[edit]

Will there be a Gnome Week next year? Will Gnome Week be every year? I think it should.  Tcrow777  talk 08:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to see this happen again :) Thereen 19:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will make sure that Gnome Week will happen again next year, I wish I could have done more this year, but I have been very busy.  Tcrow777  talk 22:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When is Gnome Day next year.  Tcrow777  talk 22:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Probably the same date as this year, or at least a similar date - • The Giant Puffin • 15:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Late starter

[edit]

I'm going to be a late starter on this for the reasons I gave on my sign-up (I'll probably be along at the end of it). If anyone wants to give me (on my user talk page) a bunch of things to be looking at after the main week is done (things you wanted to get done etc) I'll happily work through them as part of the effort. Pop-culture, science, education and, well, things of an adult nature would be the easiest things for me to get into.

Also do we have a standard Edit Summary message for this drive such as "this page has been Gnomed" or "edited as part of the Gnome Week drive"? ThanksAlanD 20:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot about the Edit Summary.  Tcrow777  talk 02:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • For things to be looking at after the main week, I would say the two biggest priorities are Category:Cleanup by month (backlogged since 2005) and articles to be wikified. Those are the most conspicuous problems. Plenty of different subject matter in there, and some rather high-profile ones as well.

Cheers for that, will do. AlanD 17:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Final totals?

[edit]

I managed to knock out about 100 articles. More if you count minor edits. You? Crystallina 03:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mine does not look good: 1 and part of 1.  Tcrow777  talk 04:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I helped improve about 50 articles, and reduced the WP:Biography unassessed backlog by 500 - • The Giant Puffin • 08:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is anyone going to do a results assessment? I've been gnoming massively more than previously, but I haven't marked my gnome-week inspired edits. Others have probably been doing the same thing. Given that, assessment would probably be somewhat difficult to do and would probably produce fuzzy result numbers. -- Boracay Bill 11:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We most certinly hit more then 90 articles, over 90 Wikipedia users participated, if the average number of Gnome Week edits per user is 25, then we had about 2,250 Gnome Week edits (rough estimate), while that is an admirable sum, We just need to do do more next year.  Tcrow777  talk  22:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If metrics are going to be published (and, IMHO, they should be), good data on which those metrics are based needs to be collected and analyzed. I don't think that was done very effectively this time. In my own case, I started intensified gnoming a week or so before the official kickoff of gnome week, really buckled down on it during the official gnome week period, and still continue gnoming efforts at a more intense level than prior to gnome week. I had 445 edits during May and 682 during June. The difference was due to gnome week. I didn't see any clear guidance on marking my gnomish or gnome week edits for later metrics, so I didn't mark them specially. Perhaps next year some distinctive mark could be defined which cooperating editors could place in gnome week edits. Perhaps a distinctive mark could be identified which wikignomes could, if they so choose, place in gnomish edits as a matter of routine. Perhaps something like signing edits with ~~~~(G). -- Boracay Bill 23:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Regular WikiGnomes who participate in Gnome Week should mark all of there gnomeish edits during Gnome Week as Gnome Week inspired edits, but edits made before and after Gnome Week never be marked as Gnome Week inspired.  Tcrow777  talk  04:59, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But I did provide a distinctive edit summary on the main page. I even provided it in bold text. All of the other cleanup WikiProjects follow the same protocol. I'm not sure what more could have been done, apart from canvassing every single userpage (which some people might not like). Crystallina 07:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gnome Week next year

[edit]

Gnome Day next year will be Saturday, June 21, 2008, and Gnome Week next year will be Saturday, June 21, 2008 through Saturday, June 28, 2008. See you there!  Tcrow777  talk 07:15, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But please do not edit the Gnome Week page right now, unless your Crystallina.  Tcrow777  talk 07:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's ok. Anyone can edit the page; it is a wiki, after all. I encourage it if people have good ideas to share or fixes to make. Crystallina 23:31, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest that we not change the Gnome Week page for Gnome Week 2008 until 2008, that makes sense.  Tcrow777  talk 00:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help build next year's Gnome Week page here.  Tcrow777  talk  19:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not do it every 6 months instead of only once a year? Things move pretty fast around Wikipedia. Fishal 21:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking of doing a second session sometime this fall, actually. Crystallina 22:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, I need to move Wikipedia:Gnome Week/next year to Wikipedia:Gnome Week/next Gnome Week or something similar.  Tcrow777  talk  02:49, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Any ideas?  Tcrow777  talk  02:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that we have the next Gnome Week be Friday, December 21, 2007 through Friday, December 28, 2007 and the one after that be June 21, 2008 through Saturday, June 28, 2008 and then repeat. This puts each Gnome Week 6 months apart and every June Gnome Week will start on Gnome Day and follow the original Gnome Week date.  Tcrow777  talk  06:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like Tcrow777's idea. Eddie 16:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That'd be good except for the fact that that week is during the holidays, and there would be a much lesser turnout. If at all possible we should avoid any time around the winter holidays. Crystallina 16:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I would be Chirstmas shopping, not WikiGnoming. But that is 6 months from Gnome Week June. We will have to move Gnome Week June to July maybe, but then that Gnome Week would not start on Gnome Day.  Tcrow777  talk  20:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They don't absolutely have to be 6 months apart. I was thinking around Halloween, myself. Crystallina 22:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That would be great!  Tcrow777  talk  20:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that we have the next Gnome Week be October 21, 2007 through October 28, 2007 and the one after that be June 21, 2008 through June 28, 2008 and then repeat.  Tcrow777  talk  02:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. Crystallina 19:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not make Gnome Week October 2007 Halloween themed, it offends me because it is against my religion (I am a Christian).  Tcrow777  talk  04:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't even think of that. Good point. Crystallina 02:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So far as I know Samhain has no opinion on Christianity at all, and to demand that the date because changed because Halloween offends you is just as offensive to the pagans that celebrate it and consider it an important religious festival. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 06:49, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The date wasn't changed, just the reference to Halloween. Crystallina 06:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about a Gnome Week in February, it would make all Gnome Weeks even (each Gnome week will be 4 months apart). Do you have any idea how many times I have had to update a certain number on the Gnome Week page ("Just how good are these remaining 1,920,000+ articles?").  Tcrow777  talk  04:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gnome week plans

[edit]

I think Gnome week went quite well, but I think October's Gnome week has to be better organised. June Gnome week consisted of people putting their names down on a page and we have no idea what they did afterward. There needs to be a list of tasks that people can do, to give them inspiration, and then a tracking system (like at Dragonflights Category tracker and on the WP:BIOGRAPHY assessment drive or at WP:MEC) so that we can see what we've achieved and what areas have been cleaned up most, which will also provide useful research. I suggested before this Gnome week that we have suggested task days like "Wikify Wednesday!" or something to give people something to aim at. If we implement this all it will raise our profile and draw more people in - I suspect that Gnome week generated a lot of good will, but much of it was squandered because there was no direction. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:37, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The best thing one can do is work on the backlogs of tagged articles, as they're the ones that generally both need the most attention and are getting the least attention. (Some have been waiting since 2005, which is terrible.) I don't know how to code the category trackers, although I've seen them used by other projects. I do like the idea of task days though. Crystallina 21:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why not contact Dragons flight or someone equally technical and ask them if they can put together a tracking system? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look into that for October. Crystallina 18:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Should we open signups and invitations for Gnome Week October 2007 yet?  Tcrow777  talk  17:41, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't bother. If people sign up they'll definitely forget in a few months. I'd wait until late September. Crystallina 02:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What are we going to do to pass the time until Gnome Week.  Tcrow777  talk  00:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit articles, of course. but what else are we going to do to spread the word about Gnome Week.  Tcrow777  talk  00:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New userbox

[edit]

{{User:Tcrow777/templates/days until gnome week}}

The next Gnome Week starts in −5,866 days! You are invited!

You can put it on your user pages.  Tcrow777  talk  01:51, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, nice work there. Placed it on mine. Giggy UCP 03:08, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just re-coded it.  Tcrow777  talk  02:16, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slogans

[edit]

Let's come up with some slogans. Just because we can.

My current thought, with all due apologies: "Gnome Week: We make Wikipedia not suck." (a take-off of Jimbo Wales's comment) Crystallina 02:47, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will just say this: I don't like it. When I think of Gnome Week, I don't think of that quote. I also don't like the word "suck". How about this: "Gnome Week, denouncer of Wikipedia myths".  Tcrow777  talk  06:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Funny, I've been considering writing an article about "10 Myths About Cleanup On Wikipedia"; I just need to make the number roud. Although we really don't denounce myths. Crystallina 03:08, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goodbye

[edit]

Something has come up and I will not be able to participate in October, for the most part I am leaving Wikipedia, but I will make the occasional edit. Tcrow777 Talk 09:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

October Gnome Week

[edit]

Hello everyone! It looks like Gnome Week is kicking off soon. Just to renew the suggestions made by previous users on this talk page, I think it would be great to have a daily challenge sort of thing for the gnomes. On a similar note, it would be excellent to have task days, such as "Wikify Wednesday!", "Sources Saturday!" or "Typo Tuesday!" to encourage gnomes to step out of their niche if only for one day and try gnoming in new territory. -Thereen 06:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea. Also, as Dev90 said above, we should have some way of tracking what got done and by whom. MahangaTalk 04:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How are you helping?

[edit]

Share how you are currently helping out with this project! I'm currently clicking the "Random article" link and trying to fix up or at least properly tag any articles that need it :) Thereen 06:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no!

[edit]

I missed it! Can I get on a list to be notified of the next one? I really enjoyed gnoming last spring. I think I'll gnome around a little this week anyway.  :) Fishal 14:16, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Organising closed requests

[edit]

I just moved things around a little on the project page so that it's obvious what's been done. If anyone doesn't like it, feel free to put it back! Happy gnoming... Cricketgirl 15:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gnome Week date standardization

[edit]

I propose we standardize Gnome Week dates every year.

  • February 21-28
  • June 21-28
  • October 21-28

Gnome Week in in February is mainly to close a gap and make Gnome Week every four months. Tcrow777 Talk 21:04, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2009?

[edit]

As above, if we can't do it that frequently then at least annually? Perhaps there could be another Gnome week this coming October? Tyciol (talk) 09:35, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that would be cool, it could be something similar to Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout. --Ϫ 22:04, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was also thinking that. I was wondering if we could find supporters for my project proposal. I want to propose a project called The New Gnomes. We need to get everyone on Wikipedia to make edits like a gnome for a whole year. It may sound hard, but we can do it. Here is the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/The_New_Gnomes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tech12 (talk • contribs) 03:54, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors

[edit]

Although I am a WikiGnome, I would say that effort during Gnome Week has been in a large degree done by the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. If some WikiGnome comes here, take a look at the Guild.--DThomsen8 (talk) 03:58, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Repeats

[edit]

Is there any real reason this amusing event did not become a regular feature? Dysklyver 12:43, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Gnome_Week&oldid=1146027316"