Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australia/Unreferenced BLPs

Need help creating a similar list

Can whoever created this list please do the same for unreferenced BLPs within Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal? I do not have the technical know-how. Thanks J04n(talk page) 00:53, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a tool that you can use to do this. I assume that your ourter category is Category:Heavy metal

The category intersection may work out, at depth 3 it found 23 names. [ttp://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/CategoryIntersect.php?wikilang=en&wikifam=.wikipedia.org&basecat=Heavy+metal&basedeep=5&mode=cs&tagcat=Unreferenced+BLPs&tagdeep=3&go=Scan&format=html&userlang=en]

If I get a result from the tool I will paste something to a page for you. How about at : Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Unreferenced BLPs Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that would be fantastic. J04n(talk page) 11:24, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rugby players

There are a lot of non-Australian rugby players in this list, including the incubated articles. Does someone know how to filter these out in a semi-automated way? Melburnian (talk) 05:54, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, since the cat was done by getting the intersection of BLP unsources and Aus, it can be further narrowed by intersecting with the rugby WP cats as well. seems like a lot of racing car drivers as well. I found it helpful that the AFL guys were in one separate list then I could just trawll through the list and ref it to the profile in the AFL players' encyc very quickly. If there is a similar profile book on RU/RL that will be wuick too YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 06:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

stats.rleague.com comes to mind for the RL players. Hack (talk) 06:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for removing the non-Australian ones, Hack. I also removed the ones from the incubator list by editing the categories in the articles. Nice work on AFL players, YM. Melburnian (talk) 07:15, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There may be value in re-generating the report to see if the rugby players come up again - it will also (hopefully) pick up articles that have been sorted out but not removed from the list. Hack (talk) 10:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We've also got a bunch of articles which got hit with BLP-unref tags this week - we urgently need them listed as well before some idiot comes along and deletes them. Rebecca (talk) 10:06, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was that Category:WikiProject Australian sports articles was on the Category:WikiProject Rugby league articles, so all rugby league project articles were being picked up in the master Category:WikiProject Australia articles recursive cat scan. Grrr. Noticed that just after I finished doing the comparison... which takes ages. Category:WikiProject Australia articles has over 400,000 pages, then over 80,000 after removing duplicates and non-mainspace articles. Compiling that list, then comparing it to the 48,000 Unreferenced BLPs takes a fair bit of time on my not-quite-super-computer. Including the rugby league pages, we were down to about 1480 pages to go. Hopefully it might be 1400... I'll let you know in an hour or so when the cat comparison is complete, or maybe just use Hack's hacking of the thugby players to manually remove them again.The-Pope (talk) 12:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That explains the Rugby League players but most of the articles I picked out were Rugby Union players. I assume something similar occurred? Hack (talk) 02:17, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Australian football (soccer) players

Can someone confirm that the report included people from ? Hack (talk) 05:11, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only if each article was tagged for WP:Australia on the talk page. There are effectively two ways to find "Australian" articles. One is to use all articles tagged with the WikiProject banner on their talk page - they show up in Category:WikiProject Australia articles. The other way to view every article in the mainspace category true starting with . Each "subproject" has a similar talk page/project banner vs normal category - ie Category:Australian football (soccer) players vs Category:WikiProject Football (soccer) in Australia articles.

The upside of the WikiProject method is that apart from the rugby strangeness, or some accidental copy/paste/bot mistagging, most were added specifically to include them in WP:Aust. The downside is it's basically a manual task, so it isn't complete, especially for new articles. The upside of the normal category tree method is that people are used to adding cats, but the downside is that you can get some "non-Australians" in the category from strange category branch structures. For instance, there are a bunch of Irish Gaelic footballers in the Category:Irish international rules football players cat. But as that is a subcat of Category:International rules football, which is a subcat of Category:Australian rules football, which is a subcat of Category:Football in Australia, which is a subcat of Category:Sport in Australia by sport, then Category:Sport in Australia then Category:Australia... all of those Irishmen would turn up in a recursive cat scan of Category:Australia. Which is why for this task, I've stuck with using articles that have been tagged with the project banner. And I have no idea how the rugby union players ended up in the Australian cat! The-Pope (talk) 15:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are 114 pages in the Category:Australian football (soccer) players but not in the Category:WikiProject Football (soccer) in Australia articles cat. Only one is an unreferenced BLP Matthew Hales (footballer). I'll post the rest of the list at their project talk page.The-Pope (talk) 07:26, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Hales article is a recreated version of an article deleted in September 2009. In any case he doesn't appear to be particularly notable (the Northern Irish team he played for wasn't fully pro). I expect the taggers might have some fun with some of the articles in those categories... Hack (talk) 09:27, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

De-incubation

Have referenced up articles for the following: Andy Kent, Audius Mtawarira, Barrington Pheloung so they can be de-incubated. Have also referenced up Davey Lane should be moved to David Lane though. Dan arndt (talk) 10:01, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored Andy Kent, Audius Mtawarira and Barrington Pheloung to article space. Probably best to propose a move for Davey Lane at the talk page there, with a rationale. Melburnian (talk) 13:24, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have provided references Ash Grunwald so can be de-incubated. Dan arndt (talk) 04:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another article to be de-incubated is Barbara Frawley as the article is suitably referenced now - so if someone can do the shift back into the main article space that would be appreciated. Dan arndt (talk) 03:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Melburnian (talk) 04:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thnx - Another article completed that needs to be de-incubated is Angela Keep - article is suitably referenced now & can be shifted back to main article space. Dan arndt (talk) 06:25, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Melburnian (talk) 06:40, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another article to be de-incubated is Ashley Gilbertson - references added. Dan arndt (talk) 03:33, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Melburnian (talk) 04:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another completed & ready to be de-incubated - this time Ashley Carey - references added. Dan arndt (talk) 06:06, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done Melburnian (talk) 07:55, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Peridis is probably ready to be hatched. Hack (talk) 09:36, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, thanks to everyone for bringing these articles up to standard! For future reference, incubator articles should be marked with "status=eval" instead of just moved back into mainspace. It's not that I don't just your judgment (it's fine), it's just that we want to document our former "incubatees" and hand out the proper rewards for work done. If articles are just moved straight out, there is a good chance they'll be missed. Thanks for understanding, and thanks again for your hard work. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Issues

User:Peachey88 added a bunch of actor stubs to the list, so I looked into why I'd missed them. They came down to either:

not being in the project (no WP Australia template on their talk page),
were tagged, but didn't appear in Category:Unreferenced BLPs - I think these all had been moved to and from the incubator. Maybe deletion/move related or maybe cross namespace moves don't trigger reinstatement into cats?
some weren't tagged, but Peachey88 promised to go tagging tomorrow.

The first group I'll try to weed out by doing a scan of Category:Australian people against the All unreferenced BLPs cat. I won't be able to tag them, but I'll try to post a list. The second group I think is fairly minimal, but it's something to consider before moving pages back from the incubator. The third... well not everyday, but every now and then I'll do a fresh list of all WP:Aust files, other days I just use this list as the starting point to compare against the Unreferenced BLPs list.The-Pope (talk) 16:14, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Full List view

Do we really need to show the full list? Once someone is moved into a dedicated list wouldn't it be wiser to remove them from the full list so the page is smaller and more easier to manage and to remove duplicates that might not get picked up when someone strikes/removes them once they are referenced? Peachey88 ^{(Talk Page · Contribs)} 01:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

?? BLP

Somewhere within the header section it would be good to explain just what a BLP is. For this person, it is not self-evident. MargaretRDonald (talk) 01:25, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]