Suggested new layout for outcomes at WP:WikiProject Women in Red/Meetup/140
edit- Victuallers (talk) 23:05, 30 September 2019 (UTC) (midnight here!)
- SL93 (talk) 00:27, 1 October 2019 (UTC) PIN
- Abishe (talk) 06:04, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
- dawnleelynn(talk) 07:03, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
- valereee (talk) 12:07, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
- MarioGom (talk) 12:12, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
Roser Maestro
Vera Buch
Dil Kumari Rawal Thapa non-qualifying stub
- Trillfendi (talk) 02:11, 2 October 2019 (UTC) (but it was 22:55 1 October 2019)
- PamD 07:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC) (created 18:12, 1 October 2019)
- Thsmi002 (talk) 12:18, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
- Netherzone (talk) 14:15, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
- ☕ Antiqueight chatter 16:35, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
I suggest that before the list gets too big we rearrange it for clarity. The layout above seems to me to have several advantages:
- Makes it clearer that we are asking people to list under their name
- Makes it easier to see at a glance how many stubs each person has created
- Reduces the amount of text (I don't see that we need the date and time of each creation, and "new stub" is in the definition of the list)
- Perhaps more controversially, includes "non-qualifying stubs" in the main list - more encouraging for editors, easier to upgrade it if the stub is upgraded. (Only one listed so far). An icon, or a change in formatting, might be another way to indicate non-qualifying status.
I've left the date and time that the editor created their first entry in the list - though this is probably irrelevant and could well be cut out (they're presumably already listed in the "participants" list).
It might be better to ask editors to add themselves in A-Z order, rather than just at the bottom?
If we adopted this revised listing, then of course the instructions on how to list an entry would also need to be tweaked.
This list represents the content of the list on the project page at 10:10, 3 October 2019 (UTC), barring any typos.
Alternatively we could put the whole lot in a table, making it easier to sort every which way, but that would make it more difficult for editors to add their new entries.