I've shoved the information from the page into the standard wikiproject template. Feel free to change, alter, or otherwise improve. If you think I've made things completely worse, feel free to revert me. I won't be offended. -- Whpq (talk) 14:17, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
A definite improvement, great job! I think we need a quick link at the top to the current category we are working on, I'll add that in.--Milowent • talkblp-r16:35, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I've added some navigation to the history section so we can access the records of our past work. The navigation templates assume that the archive follows a naming convention of "month yyyy" so we need to ensure that when we archive, we follow this naming. Milowent named our first go around "April 2008" so it's been picked up by the template. -- Whpq (talk) 17:39, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I thought this was one of the most creative pieces of vandalism I've come across. At least, I assume it was vandalism - slipped into the article some time ago by an IP-user. Hallucegenia (talk) 17:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, sounds like vandalism. I've been pleased so far to see that vandalism like this is pretty rare, and when you do see it, only the most gullible would fall for it. IP editors seem to be more trouble then they are worth, since registering is so darn easy.--Milowent • talkblp-r17:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Looks like vandalism to me too, and yeah, that's one of the most creative examples I've seen yet. I've been surprised at how little I've seen here in the "old end of the unsourced pool", a few hoaxes, 2-3 seemingly clear attacks, but I expected the reality to be much worse. --j⚛e deckertalk17:39, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Where Next?
Nearing the end of July 2007 brings the question which month we do next. I would vote for an oldish month but one towards the middle of the pack rather then the very oldest. How about Sept 2008, and then perhapa work backwards toward April 2008? Hallucegenia (talk) 13:33, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
May I suggest August 2007 and onwards? Aside from the fact that these are generally the oldest and therefore the articles least likely to have current editors or interested active projects; I've got a little experiment in one of the more recent months where I reviewed the project tags for all the articles for a particular month. I'm keeping an eye on that month re others to see how much benefit we get from project tagging, and while I'm keen on this project, if you don't mind I'd like to keep you away from my experiment for a little longer. ϢereSpielChequers13:40, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Would it interfere with your experiment if we went the opposite way and tried something like April 2010 (466)? I am interested to see if the type/quality of articles being tagged in April 2010 vary from those tagged from 2007/08.--Milowent • talkblp-r16:34, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
No that wouldn't affect my tagging experiment, thanks for checking. However Tim1357 has promised to do a new Dashbot run to the authors of uBLPs, and I'm assuming that this will get a much better result for the 2010 tagged uBLPs where it will be a first request, than it will from the authors of the pre 2010 uBLPs where it will only be a reminder, so there should be a slight net gain if you go for Category:Unreferenced BLPs from December 2009. There are 692 of them so it is quite a big chunk. This should be the newest month that would have been included in the first Dashbot run to the authors, so I don't have much hope for a good response to the dashbot run. ϢereSpielChequers16:53, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I like the 379 number. We already accomplished a similar feat with April 2008, so it's both substantial and do-able. We better decide quick - we pretty much have July 2007 bottoned up. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh19:59, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
The main page is updated with November 2009, and July 2007 has been archived and the trophy cabinet updated! Not sure we have as neat a trophy to pick for July 2007 as we Joe chose for April 2008, but perhaps someone can think one up!--Milowent • talkblp-r14:31, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Is there some criteria used to select the trophy? If not and we just are looking for something with an interesting visual, I suggest this: -- Whpq (talk) 18:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Can Morton be saved?
I'm having trouble with the Morton Schwartz article - as a bit of a film buff I would hate to see the article of a somewhat obscure actor who worked within the cult film industry deleted, but I can't find any reliable sources to verify the material in the article. The multiple roles and work in films with a cult following could squeek him over the WP:ENT bar for notability, but without sources it cannot stay. In your opinion(s), would this article merit a pass through the AfD gauntlet to gather additional opinions and see if someone can come up with some offline sources, or would a PROD be more appropriate? (Note: just by writing this out I seem to have convinced myself to go with the AfD, but will leave the question up to garner other opinions). --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh16:39, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I fear a week may not be quick enough to find sources if they exist. I have sent a message on youtube to ArcheNoir who has posted clips of Schwartz movies, seeking help. I'll see where else we might dig up a cult film buff with info.--Milowent • talkblp-r17:01, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
<edit conflict> That would be fanstastic. I have a gut feeling that there could be a very interesting article here if we could just nail down some sources. Since there appears to be nothing contentious in the article I will hold off on any AfD or PROD in order to give some time for further development. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh17:09, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I've also left a note with User talk:MichaelQSchmidt who is quite good at digging up sourcing for film related articles. I've had a couple of shots at sourcing this, but there doesn't seem to be anything, including anything on IMDB (which i know is only a quasi reliable source). -- Whpq (talk) 17:07, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I've had a little look on DE wiki, but he doesn't seem to have an article there yet. I agree that its worth trying to save him. I think he's from the era before the Internet and if he'd had the same success in the 90s it would be easy to source him without recourse to paper sources. None of those films seems to have an article yet. ϢereSpielChequers17:08, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Not much to add to the above, save that I've come up empty too. Had trouble locating some of those films, which (in addition to the possibility of a hoax or the guy being non-notable) makes me wonder if the film titles may have undergone inappropriate translation. Sounds like folks have some good "film buff" connections, I was going to add that AfD might give you some exposure to similar folks at the appropriate WikiProjects, many of which list related AfD discussions, but it sounds like y'all are way ahead of me. :) --j⚛e deckertalk17:12, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
A few odd things about the article. It was created on 4 May 2007 by EnzoCrocetti, his sole edit, and the text hasn't substantively changed since its creation. Ponyo did remove the last bit, which is bizarre, "Got married to actress/model Francesca Rocca,who died a few months later under mysterious circumstances. The case was never solved. In 1984 he disappeard." If not for all the video clips lying around, most of which seem to be posted by this "ArcheNoir" group, I would have thought it was a hoax. There is 28 minute collection of film clips here[1], at 14:00 into it, the credits to one of the clips says Enzo Crocetti was the editor. I didn't watch the clip very closely, but something seems potentially fake about it. So, let's keep up the searching.--Milowent • talkblp-r17:45, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
LOL, i think it is a hoax. See this youtube vid, [2], there is a comment by rudischlott in German that says, via a rough Google translate, "You are already funny birds ... even NEN Wikipedia entry you have made for "Morton Schwartz" on the legs, hehe, great! plenty of time for ne Mockumentary about Will not it? And none of you has come so far on it? Can I even believe it!"--Milowent • talkblp-r17:49, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Drat! I've been bamboozled! I suggest we prod the article with a link back to this discussion as evidence. That will give all interested parties to a chance to add verifiable material if it exists. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh17:53, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Sounds like a good plan. I've saving the text of this one to post on my blog for fun. BTW, there was a german wikipedia version that looks like it was deleted the day this one was created (may 4 2007). More comments on the hoax nature of this exist on youtube comments of other clips, e.g.,[3], "Hahaha, fucking amazing. Western psychedelia. If this was for real, I'd buyit." But friends of ArcheNoir in the comments artfully make claims they have seen the movies, etc. If Morton Schwartz was a hot chick, he coulda been another lonelygirl15.--Milowent • talkblp-r17:58, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Yup... hoax article, as none of the films seem to exist. And if any were "cult" or "successful" as asserted, there would be something somewhere. As it at least makes assertions, it might best go to AFD, though it might qualify for a BLP speedy as unsourcable. Long and short... even were the titles to be horibly mis-translated, there would be something somewhere... but there is not. Buh-Bye Morton. Schmidt,MICHAEL Q.18:11, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
But perhaps we could use a user box. So yeah, I know we have enough to do with the huge backlog of unreferenced BLPs, but a user box makes us look somewhat organised and ontop of things as a Wikiproject.
I've come across a few one line Miss World 2008 contestant stubs. Having won a title and represented their country at Miss World would be notable within the pageant world, but where there is no independent coverage of the person and they have done nothing notable outside of the pageant win, are they really notable? Example: Nasreem Ndiye. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh17:16, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
My understanding is that the delegate to the world pageant is the winner of the qualifying national contest. On that basis, I'd say that person is notable as the winner of a major competition. I would judge that against verifiability. If we can verify the information in a reliable source, I'd say job done. If we cannot verify the claim to notability (national title, participation in world compeition), then I'd go with the policy statement "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth", and put the article up for AFD. I'd not go the PROD route as more eyes on it would be a good idea. -- Whpq (talk) 17:38, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Whpq. With respect to Nasreem, I suspect a name change, perhaps due to marriage. The "Miss Tanzania" home page [4] lists the 2008 winner as a Nasreem Karim. I notice that a *lot* of the contestents for 2008 have sources for their national titles in the table at.Miss_World_2008 For a national prize like this, I would suggest that the award-giving organization is verifiable enough in terms of the names of its winners and national finalists. --j⚛e deckertalk18:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, a primary source such as the award-giving organisation would be fine for verifying this type of basic information as it requires no interpretation or analysis of the infromation and merely confirms a straighforward fact. -- Whpq (talk) 18:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I sourced a Miss Chile (Miss World contestant) earlier. In most cases there will be coverage in the home country, but it would be harder to find in a country like Tanzania. I agree with Joe that verifying the award via a primary source is sufficient, at least for Miss World contestants.--Milowent • talkblp-r18:17, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Done for now, but I've left the photo with the other title. The photographer is the editor who created the original stub, I've dropped him an email asking him for his assistance nailing down the name thing.--j⚛e deckertalk18:47, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Ok, thanks all! Nice to see everyone is on the same page; and as far as themes go I much prefer Miss World to Gaelic footballers and hurlers! --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh18:28, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Great change of pace, for the month-of-hurling I was able to find a hurling trophy, and clearly we'll need some sort of tiara for this month when we complete it, but this opens another question... what was the right "theme" for a trophy pic for our cabinet from the last month we did? Ideas? --j⚛e deckertalk18:47, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I was away for a few days so I missed out on some of the fun. The only thing that sticks out for me was a couple j-pop articles and the Morton Schwartz hoax from yesterday. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh19:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, then perhaps in honour of the hoax that sent us scrambling around in many directions looking for sources, we make the trophy Piltdown Man, a major paleontology hoax. -- Whpq (talk) 19:21, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
C'est fantastique! I think it's perfect, and honestly that hoax was the most entertaining thing to hit my wee corner of the wiki-world in a long time. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh19:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
That's an AfD result I hadn't seen before. Wacky! A quick gift to whoever takes on that task: [5], there's a ton of stuff out there behind a $3/view paywall, but not as much free. --j⚛e deckertalk20:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Wow! What a coincidence. Irv Weinstein was a fixture in Buffalo. The Buffalo broadcasts reached into the Toronto area, and I remember him anchoring Buffalo's Eye witness News which would breathlessly lead with a story on another "Fire in Tonawanda!" as mobile TV news camera crews were still a bit of a novelty during that time, and house fires provided good visuals. -- Whpq (talk) 20:35, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Having lost my home in a house fire in 2008 I can attest that the allure is still there for newshounds - I become the unwitting star of several local news programs - pajamas, baby, and all. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh20:44, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
<edit conflict> Oh no, I didn't mention it in order to start a 'pity party', just wanted to point out from first hand experience that the facination with filming and reporting fires is still prominent. Everyone was fine, people and pets included. Our new digs are much nicer and it was certainly a lesson learned, the lesson being buy fire insurance. Seriously, if you don't have it log off now and make some calls, because you never know. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh20:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
I enjoy the occasional challange, but Sidra Iqbal will require some major, MAJOR, revisions in order to be referenced and improved. There's so much puffery and POV that I can't even begin to determine if there's any wheat amongst the chaff. Any takers? --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh19:19, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I found one so-so ref and changed "unreferenced" to "BLPsources" but I won't weep if anyone wants to challenge.--Plad2 (talk) 19:53, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
My personal preference would be to choose a month with a bit more "meat" on it - at least 200+; that being said I would have no issues with sourcing May 2008 if that is the month that is chosen. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh18:03, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't have any real preference myself, save that I'd like a month with no more than about 500 entries in it for now, other than that, it's all good. :) --j⚛e deckertalk18:51, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm running out enthusiam for dealing with the remaining 75 articles in Nov 2009, which seem to me to be largely un-notable musicians, minor sports people or beauty pageant contestants. I'm finding the few remaining articles falling outside these categories very time consuming to source and I wonder whether they are really worth it. I've quelled a desire to PROD the whole lot and would like to propose that we move on to another month. Any suggestions anyone? (or perhaps I should just take a break)--Plad2 (talk) 20:53, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I did about 5 articles yesterday but can't complain much because i haven't been very active lately. I do think its better to wrap up one month before officially kicking off another, though we can certainly pick a target month now if someone wants to get an early start. BTW, what happened to our trophy entrys on the main list of Unreffed BLPS?!?!--Milowent • talkblp-r14:56, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Ok folks, I count only 16 articles left in the Nov. 2009 group to be referenced (the remainder are currently undergoing AfD or PROD). The tiara trophy is officially within reach! Any picks for the next month to take on? Assuming anything in the 300-400 range is do-able, how about October or November 2008? --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh18:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Cool. I have no clue how to set it up myself though. Regarding the remaining handful of articles - I've Gone through all of them and they fall into two groups 1) those which I cannot find RS but seem notable (e.g. Pampidoo) and 2) those that make me want to pretend I never saw them. For this second group I can find sources, but the articles really need a thorough overhaul and possible stubbing down to sourced content only (I'm giving the side-eye to you Tran Thu Ha). Also, I'm wavering on putting Poe Darli Theintan up for a second AfD if no one can source it - the arguments for keep were weak and didn't result in any additional information or sources being added to the article. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh20:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Indeed, I'm nearly at the same place. With respect to Poe, I had missed (bad editor, no cookie) the previous AfD until I prod'd it, so I retracted the PROD and have (just now) resubmitted the AfD. We've a fair number of folks here at the rescue project, I'm pretty sure we can get a consensus one way or another.
With respect to pointing the project at the next month, I wouldn't want to step on any toes, but I bet I could figure that out if we were just a little closer. Almost there! I'm still dealing with post-Greenland-trip triage-of-real-life, so I haven't been here as much as I'd like, but I hope to be a more significant participant here soon. --j⚛e deckertalk04:21, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
These are the articles that are still outstanding:
It would probably be worthwhile posting to specific wikiprojects that are related to those people. For example, requesting assistance from Wikiproject Malaysia for Chamras Saewataporn may get us some progress. Bobby Patterson the surfer is both notable and sourceable. I will get to it if somebody else doesn't clear it before me. For anybody dealing with Chris Taylor, the game designer, please be aware that there are two Chris Taylors in game design and so this one is not to be confused with the founder of Gas Powered Games which put out Dungeon Siege. -- Whpq (talk) 14:48, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Could someone more technically adept than me kindly set it up the new month and archive Nov. 09? We could probably dump some of this talk page in an archive as well - we're a chatty bunch and it's building up! --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh14:01, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Motivational idea
Following on from an earlier post I thought it might be nice if instead of aiming at zero articles left in a given month that you aim to clear a certain % or get down to a certain figure. This way your not padding out time at the end of a month waiting for the few remaining articles to be cleared. Regards, SunCreator(talk)16:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
If memory serves me, the reason this project was developed as a sort of adjunct to WP:URBLP was to set concrete and definitive goals - the most easily trackable being entire months at a time. The URBLP group tracks progress through timeline goals, which to me seemed too...vague. The approach of WP:URBLPR works much better (I'm only speaking for myself here) as a motivational tool in that entire months are completed at a time resulting in a strong visual representation of what we have accomplished. I think both projects work well, but I like that they are approaching the referencing work in different ways, thereby attracting editors who respond to different goals/motivations. --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh17:48, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. I wasn't suggesting you don't have a concrete figure, but that the figure could be something other than zero. Anyway, it was just an idea. Regards, SunCreator(talk)18:21, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Speaking as the person who posted the plea Sun Creator refers to, I think it's OK to wait to switch to a new month until every article has been either sourced or tagged for deletion. The target of "0" is quite powerful as the numbers go down. I do think it might be an idea to start the discussion about which month we are going to tackle next as we get down to the last 20 or so articles, even if we don't "officially" start until a few days later. With this last month, I found towards the end, that there wasn't a lot more I could do and I did run out of steam for a day or so. It's no big deal. I did something else for a while and came back in for the last few.--Plad2 (talk) 06:31, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Zero, as mentioned is a powerful target and motivator. Also, we are trying to clear backlogs so repeatedly circling back to months is counter productive. The last few usually are hard to source and needs somebody to finally put their foot doown and send it off for deletion. That won't happen if we leave articles in the category. I and probably others circle back around to the tougher ones multiple times before I'm convinced it should be packed off for deletion. Leaving articles in the category would lose that work history as it isn't written down and can't really be adequately expressed to other editors in the talk page. Finally, a slowdown at the end of the month isn't a bad thing. It gives me a break from this particult project to work on somtheing else. -- Whpq (talk) 19:59, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Advice please? I had prodded Toshiya Fuji because I couldn't find any reliable third-party references for this Japanese TV actor. I had seen the TV.com listing but took the view that this wasn't sufficient to count as a reference (since there's a school of thought which regards an IMDB listing as a bit iffy, TV.com seems even more so). Now the PROD has been removed by an IP, which has added the TV.com as an EL and added a "no footnotes" tag, refers to "references" in the edit summary but has added none. My instinct is to send the article to AfD on grounds of notability and lack of references but I thought I would first get a view here about the validity of the TV.com listing. If we think this is enough, I can can just add it as a ref and move on.--Plad2 (talk) 06:03, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
I think it's probably not generally considered reliable enough. The concern with IMDB, as I understand it is that some of the content is volunteer provided, which leads to the possibility that some of it is wrong (hoax, error, whatever.) Our own description of TV.com seems to suggest that it would have the same problem. There are some discussions on WP:RSN: [7], [8], [9]. --j⚛e deckertalk06:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I should have thought of WP:RSN. I'll point out the issue to the IP and see whether that spurs him/her to supply references. If not, after a day or so, I'll send it to AfD.--Plad2 (talk) 20:25, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
I am willing to take a go at it. The only problem right now is that my main computer (with Adobe elements) is totally hosed so I have no good graphics editor available to me right now. Suggestions for what type of image would be a good start. -- Whpq (talk) 19:08, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I'm not sure which images to use, I suspect that depends on the message that we are trying to get across.
We could start with getting the message written and then think about images that would suit the message. I was thinking that what we want to communicate is that "We have an interesting project that does some diverse stuff, we would welcome more members and hey we have bling! So to turn that into an ad perhaps we could have the following lines:
Bandits, beauty queens and bowlers - Image April 2008 cup
Poets, priests and physicists - Image July 2007 cup
The unreferenced BLP rescue squad deals with all of them - Image November 2009 cup
Join us, and help us lift the next rescue cup! - trophy cup symbol
Did the ad happen? It would certainly be good if we could drum up a few more eyes and hands on this project. I'm happy to put a bit of time into spreading the word and it would be good to have a template to work with. Could I suggest that the template has a "current month and target" element to it (unless that is too complicated)--Plad2 (talk) 06:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
We definitely need more active editors on this Project if we are to have a hope of meeting the end year targets. I need to duck out for a few weeks now as I've been neglecting the (very necessary) revision for a couple of upcoming exams but I'd be happy to help spread the word when I come back. I fancy something simple like the Copyright Cleanup ad to start with. We could get creative and and witty later on if we want to. Any chance one of you clever folks could rustle something up?
BTW I think we could also do with a template message for Projects along the lines of:
Hello! Can you help with (profession) (article name)? It was tagged as an unreferenced BLP in (current focus month) which is the current focus month of the Unreferenced BLP Rescue Project and we're hoping that someone here with specialist knowledge of the field might like to take an interest and help provide reliable sources/determine notability and provide reliable sources.
We've had a series of messages going out to projects about uBLPs over the last few months, and each project gets a list of uBLPs tagged for their project that is updated daily. I suspect if we shift to individual messages about individual uBLPs some projects might well get narked. Better in my view to make sure the relevant project tags are on the talkpage - that way they will get it on their list. As for the ad, I don't think it happened, I still think it would be a good idea but we need a willing volunteer with a graphics editor. Another lower tech possibility is to get a signpost article, I did that for my Death anomalies project, and we got some extra eyes and over 250 anomalies resolved in ten days. I think they may be a little jaded of me at the moment, but if someone else submitted an article I think it would be worthwhile. ϢereSpielChequers23:24, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
While I think that WSC has an excellent point that tagging every article that could used specialized attention could do more harm than good, perhaps (what do y'all think?) a template could help out now and then? I did up a test over in my userspace:
Can you help with photographer Joe Decker? It was tagged as an unreferenced biography of a living person back in October 1961, which is the current focus month of the Unreferenced BLP Rescue Project. We are hoping that someone here can help us out with specialized knowledge of the field, and provide reliable sources and/or help us determine notability. Thanks!
Joe, I think that looks great! And just to be clear, I wasn't proposing that every Project gets one of these for every article in their scope in the focus month. It's really for the dregs as we get to the end of a month where we could spend ages trawling for sources and/or trying to establish notability when someone with specialist knowledge who knows where to look could get the job done a lot more quickly. A further thought I had overnight was whether it might be possible to have the soon to be revived ArticleAlertBot list the relevant focus month UBLPs for each Project. That would have the advantage of a) providing the Projects with the information (and a manageable list of names rather than the total number) b) avoid the possible irritation of cluttering up their talk pages c) provide a constant advertisement for the Project. No idea whether that would be possible. I also think WSC's idea of a Signpost article is a good one. Is there a statistical angle we could take which would get as much interest and attention as the Death anomolies and your RfA piece?--Plad2 (talk) 05:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I think a better use of the projects would be to check the specialist sources that many list on their project pages. I'm sure you could also do personalised non-templated enquiries re individual articles, but I would avoid mentioning the project or sending them lists, as this would be seen by some as spam. We've had to throttle ourselves re notifications of the lists of all uBLPs and also give the projects an opt out mechanism. It wuld be a shame if we had more projects opting out of the lists of all uBLPs because they started getting lists from here as well. What I would suggest is a short personal note."Hi, I'm working on example which is I think relevant to this project as xe used to play this sport/came from here, please could someone point me to some reliable sources that could be used as references?" ϢereSpielChequers08:02, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I've done what I can with "S", which is now down to 4 problematic articles. In the process, I dealt with four minor Jordanian princesses (couldn't find any policy guidance as to when minor royalty ceases to meet WP:N, so just added an official royal family tree and changed the tags to "BLP sources"). I'm left with one Israeli footballer, Ma'oz Samya (I've no idea what do to with this as the only possible source I could find is in Hebrew and I don't know enough about the international game to know whether he meets WP:ATH); a Punjabi former politician, Jathedar Sekhwan; a Somali General, Hussein Shuqul; and a music producer, Smaze, who seems to live most of his life off the grid. I've posted notes asking for help with the politician and the General at the relevant Wikiprojects, so perhaps those two might vanish from the list in due course.--Plad2 (talk) 07:50, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
This month is from over two years ago and whilst the normal death rate is little over 1% in the developed world I suspect its much higher amongst people who have become notable as this excludes children and skews towards age. Also if someone has only sourced an athlete from old programs etc then we shouldn't be surprised if they've since died. So I'm not surprised if a lot of our BLPs are actually of dead people. BTW there is usually a living=yes line on the talkpage that also needs changing. ϢereSpielChequers18:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I change the talk page biography banner to "living=no" for any biographies I come across where the individual has died and remove the "Living people" category as well. In the three prior months that we referenced BLPs as part of this project I didn't come across a single instance of the subject of the article having died, so it was noticeable to me when two of the first handful of articles I sourced from May '08 had "passed on". --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh21:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I've found lots, but it varies dramatically according to what sort of BLPs you look at. It varies a lot by age of article and subject matter. When people are creating BLPs of sportspeople who were active in the mid twentieth century one shouldn't be surprised that a lot of them have since died, or indeed were dead when the article was created as some people use one source to create manny articles without necessarily even googling their subjects. Equally if someone has been creating BLPs of senior academics and Politicians then the probability is that they were alive when the article was written, but the annual death rate amongst people who are over 80 years is is quite high, so if an article was created over five years ago and tagged as a UBLP two years ago the subject has had at least five years in which they may have died. ϢereSpielChequers07:49, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I haven't checked the sources, but with respect to Ma'oz, if our article texts are correct (something I don't assume), the 2006-7 stint playing for Hapoel Petah Tikva, 21 appearances, would qualify as "playing at a national level", the article on that football club says that the club was playing in the top tier league that year. The loan to Hapoel Kfar Saba wouldn't (it's said to be second-tier), and the single appearance with Maccabi Netanya might seem to barely technically qualify, but I just saw an AfD close as delete in a case where someone had a single national-level appearance in what seemed a triumph (for other reasons) of common sense over lawyering. At any rate, my guess is that if we can source the Hapoel Petah Tikva appearances in 2006-7 that the player meets WP:ATH, otherwise... it's not nearly as evident. --j⚛e deckertalk16:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
November 2009 theme trophy
November is done but for those headed for deletion. It's time to pick a theme trophy for the month. Miss World contestants kept popping up working through the month, and it's been suggested that a tiara would be suitable. I've picked out two tiara images, and a Miss World image (that shows tiaras) as candidates for the trophy. Please feel free to suggest others.
For your consideration:
Per Help:Archiving a talk page, we can set up an automatic archive for our talk page. As J'sPonyo pointed out, we do seem to generate quiet a bit of talk text. Is there consensus to make use of automated archiving? I've never done that before but am willing to take a shot at setting it up. Is there a preference between the two bots which are available to do the auto-archive? -- Whpq (talk) 14:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
I think auto-archiving is the way to go, in that way the onus is not on any one individual to perform the task. I don't really see a difference between Misza and Cluebot archiving, so I suppose whichever is easiest to set up would be preferable. Thanks for taking care of this (as well as the Nov. 09 archiving) Whpq! --Jezebel'sPonyoshhh14:39, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
I've been thinking of archiving this page manually, but I'm not sure what limit to use with regard to a cut-off point. Would threads older than 30 days be an acceptable limit for being archived? I'd set up MiszaBot, but I suck at programming and am paranoid that I would screw something up. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots17:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Sorry I haven't been around for the last couple of weeks. I've been on vacation (yay!), and been down with a cold (boo!). I'm still shaking off teh cold, but I'll try to boost up my participation level. I've set up Mizabot to archive this talk page. With any luck, I didn't screw it up. -- Whpq (talk) 18:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Sweet! (that you're back and set up the archiving) Boo! (that you've been sick). The need for archiving became increasingly apparent to me as I scrolled up and down this page repeatedly just trying to find this section. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots18:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Keeping the empty months in visible the monthly statistics
Well done to everyone who help to clear November 2009. I've been on a Wikibreak for a few weeks so I'm sorry that I couldn't help out more.
Nov 2009 is back up to "1" for a short while as I'm giving the IP who removed the PROD on Toshiya Fuji a chance to provide references. It will disappear again in due course as the article either gets referenced or sent to AfD.--Plad2 (talk) 06:50, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
The tagging on the empty months has been reverted again (along with the Nov trophy). I've restored the trophy but removed the tag and categories. Although this wikiproject (us that is) may wish to have the categories visible, it is contrary to how this works elsewhere on Wikipedia. I don't know if somebody gathers stats on these things but it may throw these reports off a bit too. My own view on this is that keeping the month visible is not sufficiently valuable compared to annoying other editors. If we do want to keep this, then some form of consensus outside of just our own opinions is necessary. -- Whpq (talk) 14:24, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Under the 'open tasks' section, the "current" number is listed three times. For previous months didn't we have the starting number listed as well (e.g. Number of unreference articles for November 2008: 326. Current number:181)? I found having the original number litsed helpful in gauging progress. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots01:20, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello all! I've finished off the Fs for this month and have come across a possible theme emerging. Within the Fs alone there were two or three woman's tennis Hall of Famers. If you come across any yourselves this month, I have simply been adding the International Tennis Federation profile template and the Intercollegiate Tennis Association hall of fame profile (example here) as general references. The articles I came across all had fr.wikipedia interwiki links that have these links already in place, so its pretty easy to transfer them over. Hope this helps! --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots17:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I didn't find any tennis players myself but I didn't notice any particular theme either so I'm happy with this.--Plad2 (talk) 06:05, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Time to start thinking about the next month to tackle?
I'm thinking that we could tackle the back of the queue, Feb and March 2008. Though at some point we will have to make a start on one of the really bad months in 2009. Perhaps by targeting specific letters, or a specific numerical reduction in the month? Any thoughts anyone?--Plad2 (talk) 18:32, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
My only concern with working on the very last month is that people outside of this project who are intrested in sourcing BLPs seem to be naturally drawn to the oldest month. By picking any month other than the very oldest month we are tackling the backlog from multiple angles. My preference would be anything from June 2008 onwards. Of course, this is just my opinion, and I'm happy to jump in whichever month is chosen. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots19:19, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Can I suggest either October 2008 (323) with a target to be done by end November 2010 or December (a more challenging 639) to be done by end December 2010? Not that it really makes much of a difference since they all have to be done at some point but with November 2008 down to the dregs, I fear we'll start stepping on each other's toes if we don't start something else soon.--Plad2 (talk) 20:24, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
While the overachiever in me is screaming to take on December '08, we've been completely succesful with the 300'ish range, so perhaps we should go with October '08? --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots16:18, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
I like the idea of doing December 2008 and completing it by end of December 2010. We've done a number of months now and a new challenge would be good! Any opposed?--Milowent • talkblp-r13:12, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Resources: sub-page or new section on Project page
Coming back to this question after a day at the coal-face (and comparing with other Projects), I'm inclined to think this might be best as a section on the Project main page - at least to start with. If it starts to get unwieldy we can move to a sub-page in due course. OK?--Plad2 (talk) 18:34, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
It did make me sigh when I saw all the old stuff being trotted out again. I do wish all the energy and passion which is being expended over there could be directed instead towards working constructively and collaboratively on the actual problem. Excellent responses from Joe Decker and Uncle G, I think. Now I and my teaspoon are going back to work. --Plad2 (talk) 20:50, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
The AN thread creator, on his talk page, told me "I have absolutely no intention of ever sourcing an unsourced BLP." (User talk:Tony Sidaway). Because wikipedia editors have no boss, and we're all volunteers, none of us has the true ability to boss the rest of us around. But wishing you could is what draws some people to try to impose policies that don't stick in practice. You can't solve a problem if you won't jump in and get dirty.--Milowent • talkblp-r20:58, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Milowent, I sympathise but I think it's important to keep the emotion out of it. There's a lot of hot air going on over there and a lot of old ground being gone over. Track record of these things suggests it will run itself to a standstill in due course. We need to stick to the facts. We started with 52K UBLPs. Of those (if I'm picking up the correct fig from the blizzard of stats being flung around), we seem to have in the order of 16K left (per The Pope). As I've said over there, in the time I've been working with this project, I've found only one really bad apple. From Joe Decker's earlier post over there, my experience is similar to his. If between us we've accounted for 2K+ of the backlist and only found 3 really bad ones, that would suggest a) that the problem is centered in a very small proportion of the UPLBs and b) that we are going to find them and root them out in a matter of months. Perhaps we could pool our count/experience from this project and report it over there. It might have more impact as a statement from the Project rather than from individual editors.--Plad2 (talk) 06:50, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
I appreciate that you all can keep calm, its probably for the best that we all don't flat call them out for their abusive claims not based on any reliable evidence. Now, onto more constructive solutions, I did post elsewhere on the AN thread that our experience here is that very very few uBLPs are problematic. We have eliminated five months of the backlog systematically, so this is a decent sample size to make that claim upon.
In fact, in my case, the few I have found with unsourced contentious material were accurate. Just earlier today, I threw some quick cites up on Troy Hambrick (from the current project docket), which included the unreferenced statement "In September 2005, Hambrick was arrested on domestic abuse charges, which were dropped after prosecutors declined to file formal charges." That information was true, but the article omitted any discussion of his many other run-ins with the law, e.g., in 2008 he was sentenced to five years in jail for selling cocaine, its a sad story. In fact, any quick google of that subject pulls up his many horrible exploits, which reminds me of a point I haven't made this time around: When it comes to BLPs that will have contentious content, wikipedia is probably the fairest place on the internet to such people. We have higher standards than most, and often fact check better than the mainstream media. We are not perfect, but when you delete the BLPs of such a person for being unreferenced, internet readers will often end up relying on less reliable sources and websites, so a notable person will be left more damaged by the deletion of the article than the existence of an imperfect one. This theory may be hard to prove, but I have some evidence to support it. For the past year, I have reposted selected deleted articles on my blog[10], including some BLPs. Some of those BLPs get a lot of lot of traffic via google searches, such as Shaycarl and Crissy Moran and Debrahlee Lorenzana (hmm, Debrahlee's entry has gotten 15 hits in the last 20 minutes, maybe she's in the news again this week). These articles are no doubt the most reliable sources of information on these folks, and I submit it is a disservice to abdicate what has become wikipedia's de facto role for every notable person--to try to provide a fair article on them.--Milowent • talkblp-r13:28, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
This is precisely why it would help to keep the empty months visible in the statistics, so that people could see the progress being made. Sigh. Hallucegenia (talk) 08:32, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
