Wikipedia talk:Contribution Team/Archive 1

Archive 1

Table of contents?

Do we need it? Drosenthal (talk) 18:22, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I think this question has resolved itself. ;-) Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 01:53, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Logo usage

Can we use the WMF logo for things related to this effort (e.g. userboxes)? Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 19:24, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't anticipate a problem, but let me double check. Drosenthal (talk) 20:49, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes you can, but we'd prefer if you use the puzzle piece logo instead. Drosenthal (talk) 21:59, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay, will do. :-) Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 01:51, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Watching

I'll at least watch this page, to see what's up, and maybe try to help. --Kim Bruning (talk) 02:07, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Kim. I'm going to be working on supporting this project with Dan and Theo10011, you know where to find me with questions :) Keegan, Wikimedia Fundraiser 2010 (talk) 07:14, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Completed task log?

Is this needed for any sort of WMF-side statistical analysis? If not, I'd suggest we get rid of it and just remove completed tasks from the list; there's no real significance to the information, and anyone really curious can always piece it together from looking at the page history. Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 06:51, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Statistical analysis, no, but we are looking to log the steps in the process so we can try to replicate the workflow for other applications. ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 17:22, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Is the log actually going to provide that, given that a lot of the tasks are ongoing, and won't be moved to the log until long after they're begun, if at all? I'm not opposed to keeping the log around if the staff think it'll be useful in some way; but I think you guys might be over-estimating the amount of information that can be extracted from it. Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 05:45, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, the log will be able to provide that, by giving us completion times for certain tasks, as well as allowing us to see where the stumbling blocks are, and be able to replicate the workflow. Ongoing tasks shouldn't hurt the log because those tasks tend to be built into our process elsewhere. ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 19:59, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion

I noticed a couple different folks dropping these Invitation messages by hand and I wanted to suggest using either a bot or AWB. It lacks the personal touch I admit but it seems to be a standard canned response so placing it on 1000+ WikiProjects seems a little mundane. --Kumioko (talk) 20:22, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey Kumioko, we do have bot resources, but some of it we're doing by hand to try for a better response rate. ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 22:40, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Careful, don't drop too many invitation messages of course ;-) . Definitely not 1000 at once! If you don't know what you're doing, you'll go over dunbar's number and blow up your project. --Kim Bruning (talk) 18:20, 11 November 2010 (UTC) 18:19, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Given the usual response rate to such invitation, I think there's little risk of all 1000 people showing up here! ;-) Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 02:19, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Regrets

Thanks for the invite, but I am so busy off and on wiki that I could not do a decent job. Bearian (talk) 13:32, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

No worries, if you get more time please keep us in mind! ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 18:27, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Banner

SO I can turn this off in my preferences, which is great if I change machines or browsers. But there are 700+ projects.... Sigh. Rich Farmbrough, 16:45, 13 November 2010 (UTC).

Yeah, that can be annoying. But, how often do you go to various projects anyway? It only takes a few clicks to make them go away, so it's really not so bad. ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 18:26, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Fundraiser press release

I've added the press release for the fundraiser to the FAQs section. If someone could prettify it, that'd be great (please don't change the content though, as it's ascribed to Moka). ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 18:28, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I've cleaned up the typography and formatting. I've also removed the "About the WMF" boilerplate section; in my opinion, it's really not needed for an internal posting within Wikipedia. Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 21:38, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Social media monitoring

We currently have a subpage for SM monitoring; is this still going to be done locally, or is it being handled on meta by the SM team now? Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 21:33, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I started to change it over to link to meta, but didn't get finished. But yes, this is being handled on meta by the SM team (they stole our jobs!) :) ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 23:29, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

IRC

I don't understand, are you really using a separate IRC channel? :-/ What about #wikimedia? --Nemo 12:06, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

We would not be appropriate for #wikimedia, because the contribution team is an english-wikipedia only project. Currently, we're using primarily #wikimedia-SM and #wikimedia-fundraising; we've talked internally a bit about finding a different channel but I'm not sure what the status is on that. (yes, technically those are Wikimedia channels too, but because of the overlap in purpose nobody is going to complain). ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 00:17, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I've registered #wikimedia-contrib - let me know if you decide to use it. ǝɥʇM0N0 02:56, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Going all out with the backlogs thing

So I thought if we were trying to encourage new people to edit and trying to get the backlog cleared the best way to kill two birds with one stone would be to set up a project page and have special barnstars and banners and userboxes (basically all the Wiki-glitz you can find) that people could put on their pages to say that they'd been a part of 'The Great Backlog Drive'. It's a nice carrot for new users to join in and it works with the feedback I've been given on WP:CONTRIB which basically says: For the love of God just tell us what to do.

I'm working on a test page now. Any input from anyone else on whether this is a good idea or even jumping in and helping me design the page, would be really appreciated. Page is here Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 23:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I like the idea in principle; a prominent and "glamorous" drive is a good way to get people to participate. However, I'm a bit confused about the timing. If we're going to make a big deal out of this, then we'll want to have it run for at least a month; otherwise, we're not going to have enough time for word to spread and for people to really participate. However, the messages I've seen from Dan indicate that the backlogs are only going to be a focus until the end of November, which isn't enough time (and is going to be heavily impacted by the Thanksgiving celebrations in the US, to boot). I think we need to decide whether we want to make backlog reduction a focus for a longer period of time before we invest too heavily in setting up infrastructure for it. Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 04:23, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Backlogs are going to remain focus. I don't know why I put a date on it. I vaguely remember having a reason but whatever it was, it is gone now. ⇒DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contibution Team} 04:27, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

I still think we should make it a limited time only thing, but like Kirill said, at least a month so people can get involved. Maybe launch it just after Thanksgiving? Could be a black Friday like thing. Or we could launch it before! I mean the UK editors won't be affected by Thanksgiving. Or we could not launch it at all! I think it looks pretty good at the moment but needs a few minor tweaks to the main page. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 10:59, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, if we're going to move forward with this idea, I'd suggest we move the pages you've set up into project space (Wikipedia:Contribution Team/Backlog Drive 2010?) so that we can make sure all the subpages are where they need to be and all the links point to the appropriate places. The tweaking of the page text is less critical; we can do that even while the drive is starting up. Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 23:45, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Panyd has that set up live now. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 20:42, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I've gone through and cleaned up the pages somewhat. There are a few things I think we need to determine before we can really "go live" with the drive:

• There's a mention on the participants' page of there being no prizes; this strikes me as somewhat counterproductive. For better or worse, many editors participate in drives because of the prizes offered; I think it behooves us to have them if we're trying to maximize participation.
• On a related note, if we're going to have prizes, we need to have some sort of table where people fill in how much they've done. The tables currently on the progress page can be adapted for this, although we need to take them out of template format.
• We need some instructions on how individual editors and/or groups participate; at the moment, the role of groups/projects in this is a bit cryptic.
• We need to come up with an advertising plan for this. When and when are we going to announce it?

Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 03:39, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

If I may suggest, Template:Announcements/Community bulletin board would be an excellent place to announce it. I think this backlog drive is a great idea and something I've been thinking about starting up myself. It's about time we start paying more attention to maintenance tasks. See the discussion at Category_talk:Wikipedia_backlog#Highlight_by_priority for some ideas about rewarding editors, including a custom barnstar by Rich Farmbrough, awarded for clearing out a monthly set. -- œ^™ 05:40, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I was taking the lead from what we were doing before and thought that if we could 'spam' as many projects who we think would be interested in this then that would be a good idea. I've also suggested it for the Signpost. I think it would be a good idea to put it up at the Community Bulliten Board but I would prefer it if someone more familiar with that area would add it there.

I thought there were also editors we could encourage to take part, like Dragonfly67 who is always dealing with New Page Patrol backlogs.

I also thought that maybe we could make a welcome template for new users that pointed them towards the page? They're looking for something to do normally so that wouldn't be a bad idea would it?Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 11:20, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm hesitant to start another spam campaign. We will wear out WikiProjects' patience very quickly if we're seen as a group that spams people for help but offers nothing in return. Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 17:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hrm, "Spam campaign" sure has a negative ring to it. I'd rather refer to it as 'spreading the good news' rather than 'spamming'. And the chance to help improve Wikipedia should be enough in itself as something in return. I would think other Wikipedia Wikiprojects would want to know about a collaborative effort by editors getting together to reduce the backlogs, which would also include backlogs in their own particular area. So, basically these projects would continue doing what they've always been doing, but with the additional encouragement and support of other editors in an organized drive. -- œ^™ 17:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Note - If we do want to make it a competition then I've already got barnstars set up and could happily make some more (or some banners) for acheivements. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 12:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay I've put up a notice at the bulletin board. Feel free to copyedit the wording. :) Hopefully if we can spread the word enough and get enough people interested we can get as many participants as there was in the first Dramaout. I'm really hoping this will be a success. Now I just need to somehow free up more time in my schedule.. -- œ^™ 14:25, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Going back to the competition aspect, I think there are two basic approaches we could use:

1. Fixed awards (everyone who participates gets an award, possibly per backlog category, regardless of how many articles they clear)
2. Tiered awards (people get different awards based on how many articles they clear)

The second approach is more traditional; but also involves considerably more tracking work, and is oriented towards dedicated wiki-gnomes rather than a broad spectrum of newer contributors. I'm not sure if it's ever been done successfully without prepared worklists, since category-based backlogs are somewhat difficult to track.

Which one should we be using here? Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 17:36, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I'd say we should go with the second option. With 'Fixed awards' I think it would diminish the worth of the award if everyone gets an award just for participating, unless it's one of those "Thanks for coming out, see ya next year" type of generic awards, then we could have that in addition to specialized awards based on a backlog category. I think if we encourage users to self-track their own achievements and note them on a tracking page, similar to the way the dramaout did their 'logging', that could work well. Or, as was noted in this discussion, User:Rich Farmbrough suggests using FemtoBot to store the name of the "last" item in a category, this way once an individual category gets cleared out we would know who cleared it. Although I'm not sure how we would know whether that same user cleared out most of the category or only cleared out the last item. I'll leave Rich a note to see if he could comment here. -- œ^™ 19:34, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's not meant to be "fair" - but the last one might be an awkward one. I think though that it serves to raise awareness if the barnstars are sitting on peoples talk pages. really the important thing is not that we eliminate backlogs, though that would be nice, but that we keep up with them, or at least have figures to understand what level or problem they are. See the mini-panic on unref BLPs being out of control, when they actually steadily going down. Rich Farmbrough, 21:59, 25 November 2010 (UTC).

Personally, I am not a big fan of keeping a log of work, whats the point really? What good does that do for the editor? For example, working on Category:Orphaned articles, I make a few edits whenever I have a bit of free time. De-orphaning is rather quick except for the most complex topics. Also, I was able to clear something like 2000+ of the orphan tags semi-automatically using AWB. If I had to keep a log of each article I de-orphan, it would be bulky, and have me making extra edits that aren't really necessary and inflate an already inflated edit count because of the number of edits required for de-orphaning (the average de-orphan takes me about 4-5 edits to add links as well as clean up dab pages and the like). Besides I am never going to take interest in most of those articles again, so the list will just sit in the back of my user space, collecting dust. It's extra bueracracy for situations like that or similar backlogs like Article categorization. I think the Fixed awards to all the editors working on a category for every time one is cleared makes more sense. Or perhaps a recognition for every 500 articles removed from a certain backlog by the team, as long as the editor has been active working on that category recently? Or maybe some type of automated record of who is removing those tags? (That would be useful for broader Wikipedia wide applications and that kind of automated monitoring is already available for project banner assessment changes. Maybe a Contribution team sponsored development project?).

However, I will concede, for backlogs that require a little more work, such as unreferenced articles, an article count is more a show of commitment. Sadads (talk) 02:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I've found, when de-orphaning, that it sometimes takes a lot more work than 'just a few quick edits', as a large amount of orphaned articles (at least, those that are worth keeping and expanding) have no in-text links from other articles, that is their subjects are not mentioned anywhere else in Wikipedia and aren't even tangentially related to another existing subject. That usually requires having to expand the content of an existing article to somehow include mention of the orphaned article. Much more work than simply adding a link in the "See also" section, an area which IMO often gets overloaded with out-of-context links that don't do much help for the reader. -- œ^™ 22:58, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to toss in my two cents, if that's okay. We've learned a lot about editor behavior over the past few months at WP:GOCE with three successive backlog elimination drives. What I can tell you is that the tiered barnstar structure is good for the majority for participants. They will push themselves to achieve a particular barnstar they want. Or if the drive is ending soon, they will work a little harder to break into the next tier. However, a few supereditors will fast outpace the majority, and they are better motivated by competition (1st, 2nd, 3rd place, in various categories). If you take a look at our backlog elimination drive pages, you'll be able to see what has worked well for us by seeing the backlog clearing patterns of the editors. If anyone has any questions, I'm now watching this page. ɳorɑfʈ ^Talk! 11:49, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Will a scatergun approach achieve much?

Having been heavily involved in WP:URBLP and WP:URBLPR for most of the year, I applaud your efforts in getting more editors involved in backlog reduction. But, I think that targeting no more than 4 or 5 important backlogs, with defined targets, would be more effective.

We've brought the UBLP backlog down from over 50k to almost 20k this year, but it has been slow going at times, unless a few editors do a surge, we struggle to do more than 50/day (net - as new and old pages still get added to the backlog).

So, make it clear how to help, where to help and what is most important. Good luck. The-Pope (talk) 00:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

i disagree. i would also like to add Category:Delisted good articles which is a really tough nut backlog. Accotink2 talk 01:16, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh Noes!

What's happened to all the sexy design we spent ages on at Wikipedia:Contribution Team/Backlogs? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 12:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I was just wondering that. Do we really want to go with a normal page look? I thought we were going for something that popped. Also, we need more prominent links to the WP:CONTRIB page on all of the pages for backlogs. Can anyone think of a way to do this if we've taken away the original links we set up? Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 12:12, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

To clarify; the main reason we were going for graphic-heavy was so that new contributors might be more interested in helping, rather than seeing a 'wall of text', as it were. I've notified Kirill and asked him to come help :-) Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 12:19, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, I agree that having graphic elements makes the page look more inviting for new contributors; but the graphics need to be reasonable and easy to follow. In my experience, a layout that's too heavy on links (and collapsible boxes full of links), such as this version will overwhelm readers more than encouraging them; to the first-time visitor, it's not clear what, if anything, they should be doing with the wall of links, and clicking almost any of them will take the reader away from the drive pages and into the depths of the backlog process.

If we're trying to go with a more graphics-heavy approach, I would suggest some sort of table on the front page that lists the different backlog "areas" and links through to the corresponding section on the progress page. The links to the actual backlog categories can be retained on the progress page, where they can be split into easily readable chunks; the front page, meanwhile, won't be as densely packed with links.

As far as links up to WP:CONTRIB go, let me see if I can get the navigation box to display neatly on the front page without having to take out the image. Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 17:10, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay, navigation template has been added. We might want to fiddle with the styles a bit, though; the default text coming out of {{infobox}} is rather small. Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 17:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Keeping track

I do think the Participants and progress page needs to be more intuitive and user-friendly. The way it is right now is a bit confusing to newer editors wanting to help out. Can someone either write up some instructions or redesign this page? -- œ^™ 14:34, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you could do something like what is being done on the WP:GOCE current drive. Maybe create a tab for every table (thus removing the need for tables), and have every editor list what they are doing on each tab that their work is applicable. Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:11, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I also agree. The current table is so confusing that even I took a moment before figuring out what goes where. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 19:01, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

This is what I was meaning about creating. Obviously, we would create the subpages if we did this. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:47, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Main Page Accuracy Content Copyright General Layout Miscellaneous Non-free images References

Uncertain about this category

I am not certain what to do about this category [1], since I fixed all the articles in it. All that are left are templates, and, if I add {{Reflist}}s to them, then the references will be transcluded everywhere. Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:13, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

They are fine, SmackBot will clear them regularly. Rich Farmbrough, 23:44, 30 November 2010 (UTC).

Missing Backlog Categories

Is there any particular reason why Category:Articles needing non-English script or text and its subcategories was not included in this drive? I'm itching to cut into the Chinese script backlog there, and it'd be nice if it would count. Also, there seem to be a number of categories in Category:Wikipedia cleanup that were not included. How were the categories to be included selected?--Danaman5 (talk) 02:42, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

While I'm not the coordinator(s) of this team, I think the goal is to tackle any backlogs present. Even though it's not included, reducing these backlogs benefits Wikipedia as a whole so I would say what you're planning to do counts. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:55, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

The reason that we don't have it currently is that it's not on the current list of backlogs in the official category. However, we'd be more than willing to add it when the project gets going officially! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 22:55, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit summary template

If possible, it would be great to have have one of those edit summary templates for drive participants like the Disambiguation people use. It would be a good recruiting tool (And give me added authority when cleaning up those beloved "trivia" sections! Man, some people really love those things). I am template-virgin, so I'm essentially suggesting more work for someone else. The Interior(Talk) 04:18, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Do you mean something like this for references?

• Cleaned up the [[WP:REF|references]] backlog for [[WP:Contribution Team/Backlogs|The Great Backlog Drive]]. (You can [[Wikipedia:Contribution Team|join]]!)

Which looks like this: Cleaned up the references backlog for The Great Backlog Drive. (You can join!)

when expanded. Reaper Eternal (talk) 11:46, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

That's what I'm talking about. Thanks Reaper! Might change it to use present tense. Does anyone have an objection these being using for Drive related tasks? The Interior(Talk) 23:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

That's absolutely brilliant! Thank you! Is there any way we can make this automated? Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 22:56, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

A script...  Ⓢock  01:28, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikiproject invitation to participate

Hi. I've been invited to take this up with "the staff." I guess that means you. I'm confused by the language in your "Invitation to participate." Beyond the strange language that we are "gearing up" for a fundraiser that has been ongoing for weeks now, I wonder at the benefit of asking people who take part in Wikiprojects (by definition "a project to manage a specific topic or family of topics within Wikipedia") to "help ...[you] support and spread free knowledge." Aren't they already? It seems a bit, well, belittling to suggest that we, the community, are not already engaged in collaboration in building content. Aren't WikiProjects by and large collaborations in building content? I'd recommend rethinking that approach, or at least that method. Philippe says, "Will you reach out to the people near you (either physically or virtually) and ask them to get involved? Tweet that you donated. Write a blog post about it. Deliver four donations from friends with your own. Help new users who make their first edit as part of the contribution campaign." I imagine that activities like that are far more in line with bringing new people into the editing community. Those of us who actively monitor Project pages, well, we're already here. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:46, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Moonriddengirl, I'm not sure exactly why that message has been cross-posted to so many projects either - or why you were given such a terse response, for which I apologise. The few editors in the contrib team at present are rather enthusiastic about spreading the word! A quick rundown: the office are trying to encourage current long-term editors to get more involved with clearing our epic backlogs, and inviting new users to do the same thing. I agree that 'spamming' all over the noticeboards was an ill-thought out idea, and perhaps it's jumped the gun, so to speak - it's part of a larger campaign involving some of the OTRS team, some real life events, and the twitter account, but we'd be keen to have your expertise. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 08:43, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

• Things on Wikipedia are occasionally outdated - this includes messages :P. As Chase Me says, we're currently engaging in a specific project which has to partly involve the retargeting of editors' efforts. Other work done by the Foundation also indicates the proportion of editors leaving includes a significant chunk of people who got bored, so the idea that we should just be targeting potential rather than current editors to get more involved doesn't really work. Ironholds (talk) 11:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Blanking of unsourced BLP

I have been directed here by the article Michel Geiss. My undertsnading was the BLP unsourced where to be moved to BLPPROD, or did I miss something ? I have a bout 400 French unsourced BLP in my watchlist. The list is a bit long to immediatelly pick-up persons and I do not have expertise on all domains, so I was happy to have a few days to react (or not !). --Anneyh (talk) 11:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Articles created after a certain date are to be BLPPRODded, but in this case, that edit was inappropriate. I'm going to bring it up with the administrator in question. Ironholds (talk) 11:48, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks I was just afraid of a change in procedures. --Anneyh (talk) 13:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Backlog Drive Update And Other News

File:Wikipedia Contrib My First Article Publication.pdf

Quick guide

Hey, I just wanted to apologise for us stopping and starting with this. We've decided that we're really going to push this forward for a six-week run from the 30th of December. Taking on advice and feedback we've been given; this is going to include merchandise as rewards for participation as well as special barnstars for helping out with the project. Hopefully this should be fun and it will also include special rewards for the projects who are getting involved as well as individual editors.

With regards to other projects; we're looking to start a new contributor's help pack in the next few weeks (while it's hopefully quiet over Christmas). Hopefully this will include the following:

• Flow-charts to help illustrate concepts such as WP:RS
• A NPOV essay which includes examples in a ‘how-to’ guide
• Videos for how to navigate the interface
• A list of simple tasks for new contributors to do (including working on backlogs and other WP:CONTRIB activities)
• A list of ways to get help for specific issues such as Speedy Deletion

We're hoping to put our preliminary versions of these things up in the next two weeks but if anyone wants to beat us to the punch we'd love it! Hope you guys like the update and thank you so much for your participation so far! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 23:05, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Can't wait. I'll design PDF printouts, perhaps, and screencasts? @theM0N0 01:23, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't know how much there is to NPOV that isn't clearly explained in Wikipedia:Manual of Style (words to watch) already. That page is good for new users—it provides specific examples and large text that one can't miss. As for RS and stuff, I don't know how set-in-stone we want this to be as policy continues to change, so I'm thinking an onwiki version using Template:Family tree, which can be continuously updated accordingly? As for screencasts and help videos, I think a written guide will work well alongside those for users who don't or can't view video (i.e. new users may not have support for ogg files or may not have that much time to see the whole thing). I can work on those (but probably will end up merging it to the existing help stuff, as we don't want new users to be confused on reading multiple pages, some simple and some complex!). /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 01:44, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

With regards to RS we were thinking something which could be updated by anyone (of course) but also something that just covered the very, very basics like 'Don't use myspace' and 'don't link to your own blog'. Of course it should link to the main policy but the point of things like that is to make something covering such things as aren't likely to be changed any time soon but that many new users make the mistake of including. Written work sounds great, we should be setting up a page for the videos tomorrow with some preliminary scripts and topics so anything that could help there would be great.

Thinking about WP:NPOV, I guess you could say what we were aiming for (and this might be the completely wrong way to go, looking for feedback at this stage) is something that isn't really written in the 'wiki' style, but more like a school text-book. The rule of thumb when writing for the general public tends to be that you write for an 8-year-old's reading level and that's the type of simplicity we're looking for here which seems to be missing from what we have at the moment.

Like I said, could be wrong, but looking for feedback and input right now! :) Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 02:22, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I would recommend rather than using an 8-year-old's reading level as a guidline, I think that it would be best to write articles to the reading level of the people most likely to read about it. For example (I know this is extreme), how many 2nd-graders are looking up Trawscoed fort or Special relativity? Similarly, an article on articles (the part of speech) would be best if written for a 5th-grade reading level.

Back on topic. I think that using the {{cite report|...}}, {{cite web|...}}, {{cite book|...}}, {{cite journal|...}}, {{cite map|...}}, {{cite news|...}}, {{cite magazine|...}}, {{cite encyclopedia|...}}, {{cite sign|...}}, and so on templates is another important thing that newer users may not know about, particularly if they do not have "refTools" installed in their preferences. Even if they do, it only gives them the cite web, book, journal, and news templates, and even then it only gives them some of the many parameters that these templates can take. Should we write a guide for using these templates so that newer users can have handy access to appropriate citation formats? Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:40, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Of course - we want all refs this way, but we really need a basic tool for this (based on User:ProveIt GT/ProveIt.js, with the GUI of reftools) @theM0N0 03:18, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• I beleive it's worth checking the psychology of reward as reinforcement. Typically when it's removed the reinforced behaviour becomes rapidly extinct, even if it was occurring naturally.
• Simple guides are great - you aim well under the average reading age because you want to be intelligible to almost everyone, and not barely intelligible at that. You want the lowest "reading age" people who are having a bad day to still understand.
• Cite templates - particularly Cite web and Cite journal can have some of the details filled by automated processes, so those parts are not a big deal.

Rich Farmbrough, 04:34, 11 December 2010 (UTC).

With regard to citations, RefTools is available for anyone as standard gadget in My preferences, new users need only tick the box. Though ProveIt may have potential it is still beta and when I tested it out failed to write changes. I use this short template to advise new users on footnotes when they are struggling - User:Fæ/help/refs - and we might consider pointing to the standard guides in this way. Fæ (talk) 07:52, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Hm, I was thinking of reflinks, Citation bot, Rjwilmsibot and similar. Rich Farmbrough, 11:13, 11 December 2010 (UTC).

Is User:Fetchcomms/RS the type of thing we want? /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 01:57, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

• I've created a little guide (see image). @theM0N0 04:46, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

• Looks excellent! A few comments:

• "new submissions" makes it sound like we have a much more formal review process than we really do.
• Accordingly, "Editors review all submissions" is incorrect; deletion might not need to be mentioned here.
• "verifiable, neutral, free, and encyclopedic" doesn't need the "free" mentioned because new users may not understand free culture rather than just free of cost.
• Use the full links, not just http://enwp.org/P:FP as I think a full link is much less ambiguous to new users.
• "Try Wikipedia's article wizard!" We don't really want editing tests all the time.
• The bit about only autoconfirmed users making pages is false. Any registered user can make a page.
• "notable topic" is ambiguous; we should define this more later. The challenge is condensing the info but there are so many "but in this case ..." things.
• The bit in the sidebar about copyrights is not clear. We can use other text licensed under the CC-BY-SA 3.0, etc. but as most people will not understand, we should probably simply say you can do it in that case but if you are not sure, do not copy text from elsewhere and drop some note in there about "if you wrote something and it was published elsewhere, you will need to go through a special process to donate your text to Wikipedia, but it is almost always easier to simply rewrite the material to use an encyclopedic tone".
• Consistency with dashes!
• "Wikipedia is not for attacking subjects or vandalizing" I seriously doubt we need to list this. Anyone reading a guide will probably not be intending to attack people.
• "talk about yourself breiflyne" what's that last word? That whole bit should focus less on userpages and more on simply why it's not a good idea to write about yourself (don't categorize people as immediately non-notable either) and even just editing the page about yourself. Maybe tel them to direct serious complaints to OTRS?
• "a crystal ball" unclear here; maybe say "not a site to report rumors or speculation"?
• "We need to reference everything" no, we don't. In more cases than you think.
• "Articles without sources may be deleted" not really. Biographical articles, yes, but others, not purely on a lack of sources.
• The last page with the three faces as backgrounds squishes the faces too much. Probably leave it blank instead.
• Is the only way to edit this with Adobe Acrobat Pro? I really like the design scheme.

/ƒETCHCOMMS/ 05:33, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh, wow. Just wow. Now imagine we merged what M0N0 has made with User:Fetchcomms/RS and stick it all in a snazzy welcome template and we're really getting somewhere. M0N0, I absolutely love it, but is there any way we can all edit it? Fetchcomms has some really good points and I'm going to go out and collect feedback today so if we can all act on that: perfect! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 09:28, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

It can be exported as a .pages or .docx, but not sure about OpenOffice. @theM0N0 19:15, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

 Updated per IRC discussions and Fetchcomms' suggestions. @theM0N0 19:29, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

• The exports are not perfect, but are at [2], [3], and [4] @theM0N0 19:38, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Is there any way we can also keep an updated pdf document as well? Not to be too awkward but I can't view any of those links on Google Docs and I'd like to edit too! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 21:45, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Great! A few more comments:

• Don't brag about our "world-class support" ... because half the time, we get incompetent newbies trying to help and/or people being BITEy and not AGFing.
• "Write it yourself without paraphrasing" well, no, we want paraphrasing, just not close paraphrasing.
• Is there a way to use titled links? Using the shortcut links just looks unfamiliar to new users.
• Dash consistency still ... no spaces before/after emdashes!
• For some reason, the link to WP:NCHP goes to WP:HC instead for me.
• Still clarify the "We need to verify everything" section; maybe say "We need verifiable information" and just "facts in an article should be backed up with a source" / "information without a source may be removed at any time", etc. Don't scare people with deletion.
• Newspapers are RS, yes, but use other examples, too; I've seen an oddly high number of people get confused about this (seriously, who thinks that MySpace is reliable for everything!) so say like books, magazines, newspapers, academic journals are RSes but social networking sites/blogs are not. A whole sidebar section should, imo, be devoted to WP:N and WP:RS, to be clear to new users on our basic inclusion criteria. WP:42 might also be something to restate here.
• Expand on the userfication thing. We're saying "oh we need this and that and not these types of articles" but we need a page or half a page to say how to go about starting an article. Maybe like Wikipedia:Article wizard/Ready for submission?
• Lastly, avoid making broad statements with the "If you answered yes to all the questions ..." because, well, lots articles seemingly satisfying those criteria are still deleted, and the questions are somewhat ambiguous and overgeneral.

/ƒETCHCOMMS/ 23:29, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Blatant copyright violation

Hi, when working through the backlog of Category:Articles with minor POV problems from September 2008, I came across this article: National Book Trust. A blatant copyvio of this webpage was inserted here, which I removed here. Is there anything else that I should do? Reaper Eternal (talk) 04:14, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

To fix the POV issues or about the copyvio? I warned the IP address who added it, and yes, the last two sentences could be completely re-written to be more encyclopaedic (although not by me at 7:30am). If I get a moment I will take a look at it later. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 07:30, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I had been referring to the copyvio, not the POV issues. Unfortunately, the warning may have gone to the wrong person since it was added nearly six months ago. Reaper Eternal (talk) 11:25, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

For blatant copyvios like that, see WP:RD1. I already deleted it. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 00:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Maybe we should add something like that to the help for new users, to direct them as to how to find a copyvio and how to deal with it. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

It might be too advanced; copyvios are kind of delicate and can be really complicated at times, especially with a CCI. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 16:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:CONTRIB/Holidays

Hey guys. I know we have a lot on our plates right now, but just to let you know that we've created some cards to help spread WikiLove this festive season! Thought you guys might like to share them or even add one if you're feeling particularly festive! Hopefully we'll get some WikiLove people interested in this too. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 14:04, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Nice ;> Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

So is this going on?

I don't see anything appearing like it is going to happen. So are we having a drive to reduce backlogs after the turn of the year? Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:38, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I haven't seen Panyd at all—I was talking to Zack, and the foundation's trying to meet the money goal. At this point, it seems unlikely we'll have a contribution campaign. Mono (talk) 04:01, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I thought that the Backlog drive was going to begin sometime around the New Year. Regards, Rock drum _Ba-dum^Crash _{(Driving well?)} 10:59, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I was assuming that the main focus was currently on unreferencd BLPs, where the 2008 backlog was recently cleared and we are making great progress on 2009. There are still lots of topics to pickup at Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/WikiProjects. Or you join the crowd dealing with random uBLPs at Wikipedia:Unreferenced_BLP_Rescue - they are planning to clear Jan 2009 by the birthday party, with a few more helpers they might also manage Feb 2009. ϢereSpielChequers 17:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello! I've been in the land of no internet for a week and a bit. The backlog drive is definitely going on but it's being officially launched either in the next few days or in January. There are some other details that need to be ironed out with regards to getting prizes for people (which we hope to have once a week), getting a watchlist notice up etc. etc. etc. but it's definitely going! Initial run should be for 6 weeks, but hopefully it'll pick up and we can have it go on for longer than that. Unfortunately the Backlog Drive changed hands halfway through its creation so although it was officially 'launched' previously, its previous incarnation was nothing compared to what we hope to achieve with the new version. Other things which are going on at the moment: New Contributors Help Pack and hopefully a Student's Help Pack in the next few weeks. However, I need to get back into the swing of things so there are going to be a few days before new pages are officially set up (again etc. etc. etc). WereSpeilChequers is right to point people towards the BLP backlog but we're really hoping to work on everything.

Anyone else who wants to jump in and take on any of these mini-projects as their own baby please just drop me a line! Otherwise I'll be updating people and announcing things as I go along. Big thank you to everyone who has put in their hard work so far. It's looking really great and it is really, really ready to launch with the exception of small logistical issues. Hope everyone has had some nice holiday time! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 22:20, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Guys, when I look at the list of unreferenced articles, I'm almost ready to stick the gun in my mouth. I mean come on, some of these articles have been unreferenced for 4 years! The backlog is piling up faster than it can be emptied. It's like trying to bail out an oil tanker with a dixie cup while it's being filled with a fire hose. People are writing articles without even a single citation. What we need is a group of editors on the front end watching articles when they are first created. They need to notify the original author that they must insert at least one inline citation within a week of article creation or it will be deleted. We have people willy-nilly writing articles that end up on our backlog list simply because the original author was too lazy to even include one reference. There are thousands of article now (after years and years) because of this. Everybody who's worked this project knows how hard it is to find references sometimes, it's damn time consuming. And take some of these articles on roads, for instance. How do you reference a freaking road? Who's going to produce a source about a road, that we then in-turn reference in the article. I came across an article about a number; I'm losing it now. Let's write articles about numbers, like any number, say the number '10'. Who's going to find a reference on it? Go read the article and see the silly references there. Frankly I don't think articles like this belong in Wikipedia, but that's just me. But people are writings these articles by the truckload, and we have to execute the impossible task of finding worthy references. Call me crazy but this needs to stop. I think WP should rewrite their software so if you don't add at least one reference upon creation, you can't save it. If you don't have a reference, it has to go to a sandbox. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 15:29, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

That makes sense, but the question is, if we implement that software, what happens to the backlog that already exists? Something has to be done with it! We could just delete them all, but who knows how many notable articles we'll be without until someone recreates them? Better to work on referencing these articles and then figure out what to do about the future. The more we can incentevise people to do this the better! So any ideas you may have would be very much appreciated. Completely understand your frustration, but lets do something positive about it (including deleting articles of no notability)! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 15:33, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Praise God, there are others who see this! I hear you brother, but deletion is like being on death row. There are endless appeals; imagine trying to run 1000's of articles through the gaunlet. I will continue, maybe in vain, to whittle down these lists. If you'd like to work together on any of this let me know. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 15:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

For reference, we have such people; see Special:NewPages. Ironholds (talk) 17:17, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Maybe somebody should check on them and see if they're okay. ;) --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 20:36, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Daily flood into Wikipedia:Backlog drive

Yes, hundreds of articles are created every day, including at least a hundred forks, misspelled titles, uncategorized, unreferenced, dead ends, inlink orphans, etc. Yes, forbidding new articles with defects so obvious a bot can detect them would stem the flood, and give some hope of working the backlog. However, it would also discourage the clueless newbies, who are the larval form of efficient editors. So, it has to be a matter of handling the flood.

Me, I never look for stubs and defects in new articles. It would have to be articles about my fields of interest, which I won't find when defects make them invisible to me. Sometimes a search turns up a few stubs and other defectives, and of course I take care of those, especially when the deficiencies are geographical coordinates, pictures of my home town, and others for which my qualifications are better than most editors. But general flood control? Not me. My expertise would be more efficiently applied if ungeotagged articles were sorted in more detail by county, township or other smaller local area, but editors who are able to do that are almost qualified to insert the coordinates, so they might as well go ahead and learn that. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:07, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Fundraiser ended

Hey guys! We're making a more formal announcement about it, and I'll have more to say for you guys directly here later, but I just wanted to thank you for all the hard work -- WP:CONTRIB was a huge part of our strategy. Like I said, I'll have more here later, but just giving you guys a heads up in case you didn't hear elsewhere (we also removed the fundraising entries on current tasks). ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 02:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Potentially 30,000 {{Unsourced}} articles are already sourced!

Hello Editors. I wanted to drop a note here that I did a database query for all {{Unsourced}} articles that also have {{Reflist}}. It returned a list of over 60,000 articles. Take a look at the list (1.1 MB). We could make a page that is similar to WP:Mistagged_BLP_cleanup, and try to work our way through them. In any case, I hope it helps. Tim1357 ^talk 16:10, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes a good idea and also even briefly scrolling through the list, I see a number of mistagged BLPs. It would probably need to be split into 4/5 pages to stop browsers from keeling over. Mattg82 (talk) 02:54, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll start going through them and retagging as necessary. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Erm looks like the list needs revising, Eric Cantona and Jim Carter (actor) are correctly tagged. Mattg82 (talk) 03:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

You're right. Regenerating now. My error was assuming that Category:Articles lacking sources was exclusively {{Unsourced}} articles. Tim1357 ^talk 05:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

The real figure seems to be around 30,000. Tim1357 ^talk 06:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

OK I've created the page at Wikipedia:Mistagged unreferenced articles cleanup and currently includes pages beginning with 0-9, A, B & C from that list. Additionally {{BLP sources}} is no longer adding articles to Category:Articles lacking sources. Mattg82 (talk) 03:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

How do you scan WP and find 30,000 articles? Is there some software product that I'm unaware of? --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 13:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not an expert, but I think there's several ways. You can request a database report at the talk page there, you can query the database using API, or you could download a database dump and scan it manually with whichever tool. Someone more knowledgable than I should be able to provide you with more details, or you could ask over at WP:VPT. hth. -- œ^™ 00:42, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

You can use Auto Wiki Browser to quickly do the finding and replacing. That's probably how 99% of people do it. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 19:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Yep, I used an SQL query on the database. Tim1357 ^talk 04:13, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Backlog Drive end date?

When does the Backlog Drive end? I am curious to see before and after statistics. --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:05, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I'd like to know this as well. Seeing as the project page reads, "Our mission is to clear out Wikipedia's backlogs during the 2010 fundraising period", and considering that the fundraiser is now over and it's no longer 2010, has the Backlog Drive already ended? Or do we just need to update the project page's mission statement? -- œ^™ 00:52, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't to be honest stop as an editor. I think updating is the best answer to that question. Minimac (talk) 05:58, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

So I guess we just keep drivin' till we run out of gas eh? ;) -- œ^™ 07:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Of course! Why wouldn't we want to continue to eliminate Wikipedia's backlogs? Reaper Eternal (talk) 22:38, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, that language of "Clear out WIkipedia's backlogs" didn't mean to completely clear them, just to work on them. It's up to you guys if you want to end it or not. There are arguments in favor of both sides.⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 19:00, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I vote we keep going. How about we update the drive on the backlog category to 2011. Hugahoody (talk) 21:56, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Similar old project

There was a project similar to this called Wikipedia:Wikiwork Brigade that could be used as a model or that we could borrow ideas from. There was an interesting point-based reward system they had going on. -- œ^™ 00:38, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Though some editors scoff at the idea of rewards/points/baubles, I think that they are an effective way of getting people to perform sometimes difficult and repetitive tasks (especially for newer users looking for userpage decorations). The Guild of Copy Editors seem to have a pretty good system, including quality checks. That sort of thing could work for a Backlog Drive or similar. The Interior(Talk) 03:52, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Regardless of whether you get a flashy decoration on your userpage or not, it feels good to know that your work has been acknowledged and appreciated by someone else, and it encourages further improvement. The point of rewards shouldn't be boasting and congratulating but rather having a sense of achievement and motivation to do more. -- œ^™ 22:02, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Progress

Hey guys. I made a tool a little while ago that logs the population of a category and records it. It loggs the population of all categories tagged with {{CatTrack}}. Anyways, I added a wikitable to: Wikipedia: Contribution Team/Progress with a full listing of all categories that are being tracked. For example, this is a link to a graph showing the number of pages in Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs over time. Hopefully it is useful. -- Tim1357 ^talk 20:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

That's interesting! I'm going to go check my progress with Category:Articles with minor POV problems Category:All articles with minor POV problems now :) . Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't appear to go very far back. [5] Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:09, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Good progress

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		For everyone's hard work in reducing the backlogs, I present this to you all. :-) Hugahoody (talk) 16:11, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you! :) -- œ^™ 00:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
• Haven't been working very hard lately, but cheers! The Interior (Talk) 00:48, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
• Why thank you! Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:50, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio needing revdel

I cleaned up a blatant copyvio in the article Jewish Funds for Justice. The history may need revision deletion (RD1). Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:23, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I just found another blatant copyvio on Apollo 3 (band). Does that need RevDel too? Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:32, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Clarification

Just checking - are only the categories listed on this page involved in the drive? Or is it all tasks registering a backlog? I do work at Good Articles and generally assessing unassessed articles, both of which are perenially backlogged, but GAN isn't listed and only certain categories of unassessed articles are listed. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:40, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

• Never mind, I found GAN on the list. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:44, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Contest question

Are we allowed to participate for the sheer hell of it and not enter ourselves into the contest? :p demize (t · c) 11:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Of course, please by all means jump in anonymously if that is what you prefer. (I for one gave up on counting before the contest officially even began.) Sven Manguard Wha? 16:16, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

TWINKLE!!!!!!

Hey, with all this backlog hoopla, it'd be nice to get some people skilled in JS to help at Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Bugs. The list is getting crazy. The biggest thing is, Twinkle (and Friendly) need redesigned to use the WP editing API. If anyone wants a big project under their belt that will impress everyone, get in there. I don't even know what the words I'm typing mean, but someone over there will! ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 13:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

GA backlog elimination drive scheduled for March 2011

Just to spam here (since this task force is on my watchlist notice), that the next GA backlog elimination drive is going to be scheduled next month, in March. Unless others object to the length, it will run for the entire month of March. Last year, it was fairly successful in getting the backlog down to below 100 GA nominations.

For those who are interested, go over the GA criteria now as well as this informative piece in the Signpost this past November, Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-11-15/Dispatches. I also have a page outlining my standards here, though it sorely needs some updating.

The WP:GBED page will be at Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GAN backlog elimination drives/March 2011, in which that page will probably be created sometime within the next 2-3 weeks. –MuZemike 22:18, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Great Backlog Drive: Why now? Why non-targeted?

1. Why is this being featured now, when WP:URBLP is still making forward progress? I fear that this may undermine that.
2. Why is there no differentiation in the scope or seriousness of backlogs? I'd certainly say that some of these backlogs (e.g., improper permissions tagging on non-free use images) are higher priority than others (e.g. refimprove tags).

Overall, I'm glad this is getting some attention, but I question the timing and lack of prioritization. Jclemens (talk) 19:47, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

This drive has been going on for at least two months, and was timed to be around the same period as the fundraiser. I'm not sure when the other one started, in fact I didn't even know that backlog existed, but then again, I'm not a writer, so I don't travel in that circle. As for the comparitive importance of backlogs, while I had no hand in planning this drive, I am glad that there was no ranking of importance or elaborate point systems, as everyone has different specialties (mine happens to be files) and I would not want to be told that my work is more or less important than someone else's. I'll go harass talk to some people about your concerns though. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:04, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

It appears the drive was recently added to the notify-all-editors cycle, odd for something that according to dates is nearly over. I'm interested in the T-shirts myself, but see nothing to indicate how they are judged. Guidance? JJB 21:03, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh my, well that can't be right. I've been doing this for two months. As for the goodies, I've been told that they're in limbo at the moment; (not that goodies should be the primary motivation.) Ah well. I suppose someone will have to get that fixed. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:02, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

According to my sources goodies are not in limbo now. They were up until a few weeks ago but now we are t-shirts and badges a-go-go! Although the backlog drive has been going on for a few months now, it's officially kicking off now. What's the difference? The difference is the goodies, the amount of outreach to the community (which will be increasing in a few days and has stuff like a welcome template and more encouragement for members in certain key areas like images.

As for how the prizes will be judged, that's a little trickier. At the moment it's based on pure volume (which will be counted across the spectrum), but if anyone has any better suggestions I would love to hear them! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 11:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Clearly there are a half dozen or so people that would have earned tee shirts had they been available earlier. Looking over the reported statistics from before the month's start, Fetchcomms, Davecrosby_uk, Reaper Eternal, Sadads, Sophus Bie, and OlEnglish come to mind (pardon me if I missed anyone, it was a quick read). I'd put my self in that list to, if not for the fact that 1) that would be rather bias, and 2) while I'd love a Wiki10 shirt, I'm not interested in the cafepress shirts. Perhaps that is worth considering? Sven Manguard Wha? 16:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

I have contacted a few people on that list already (a few declined) but I will make my way through the rest as that is an excellent idea. (And yes, you've definitely earned it). All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 10:49, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I actually already have a Wiki10 t-shirt. :) Got one from the WP10 Vancouver event. -- œ^™ 19:07, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Wot no dabs?

Am I being dense, or is dabbing really not included in the Backlog Drive? DuncanHill (talk) 21:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure it is. All maintenance tasks should be included. -- œ^™ 00:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Ending?

The Backlog Drive actually looks pretty cool, I regret passing over that link all those times. Is it true that it ends tomorrow though? And if not, does anyone have some suggestions of where I could be most helpful? Thanks so much!--Yaksar (let's chat) 00:54, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Heya, it was going to end on the 6th but it's now going to end on the 16th of March! (We really need to update this) As for what would be helpful, have you considered looking into the unreferenced BLP backlog? They could really use a hand! If you have any other questions, feel free to ask. All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 12:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Sweet. I'll do what I can to chip in when I've got some time.--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:07, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Our first real-life event

Check it out! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 12:54, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I Wish I Had Known About This Before Today

As an editor who has been working on Category:Biography articles without listas parameter for a long time I can offer some tips and make some suggestions.

• Often the article has a valid sort value in {{DEFAULTSORT}} that can be copies to |listas=
• If the value in {{DEFAULTSORT}} is not correct the name in {{Persondata}} is probably not correct.
• Not all cultures follow the name convention as described in the relevant policy. There are special rules for Arab names, East Asian names, Ethopian names and Icelandic names.
• The article may not be a biography. (Delete "bio" from the stub tag and delete the Biog banner.)
• There may be no value for |living=. Please insert it.
• There may be more project banners that should be applied, country of origin and area(s) of notability. Apply them, please.
• If there are more than two project banners on the page, enclose them in a shell. If there are more than two but fewer than six banners, use {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} (aka {{WPBS}}). If there are six or more banners, use {{WikiProjectBanners}} (aka {{WPB}}).

JimCubb (talk) 18:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

More important than all that: The reason for Category:Biography articles without listas parameter is that these articles probably also lack a sort value on the article, either in {{BD}}, {{lifetime}} or in {{DEFAULTSORT}}. The object of the exercise is to make sure that all biographies have a sort value on the article page. Please make certain that you put one there. Thank you. JimCubb (talk) 00:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Best Newcomer

What are the qualifications for being a newcomer? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:05, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

What do you mean? Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, I've been editing with Wikipedia for about three and a half months. Am I a newcomer? What about someone who has been here 6 months? Or a year? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:18, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I think it's best person who has only been working on the backlog for this month. So if you started backlog clearing in January, you're ineligible. If you started in February, you are. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:25, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

We're doing this by week so it's more - did you start this week? Rather than month. But that does mean you can just jump right in now and be eligible. This week ends on 00:00 UTC on Tuesday the 15th. All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 14:03, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Helping out newbies

So! We're looking to do some outreach to newbies which will involve making a new welcome page which focuses on contrib things but we're also hoping to have this page be a splash page for new users where they can come and get help and support from the team itself. Just as a pre-emptive 'feeling my way through this' - would anyone be interested in helping newbies we recruited (through welcome notices or real-life interaction) get started? All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 14:05, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll be glad to help anyone that approaches me on my talk page. -- œ^™ 19:33, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I am willing to answer questions directed to my talk page. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Brilliant! Thank you guys! :) All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 20:40, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps someone will want to help with Help talk:Contents/draft. Jim.henderson (talk) 12:04, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

The Tasks list

Has been updated. Just FYI! If anyone wants to grab anything just say so! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 21:03, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Image Backlog Drive

The Backlog drive is set to end sometime in the next month, although looking above, it seems like no one's particularly interested in pulling the plug. When the drive does peat out, I was wondering if it might be possible to start an images focused backlog elimination drive. The reasoning behind it is simple. There are four moderately sized backlogs that a few editors could spend months and months trying to clear out, but if we get a few dozen people involved, we could take out in only a few weeks. These are easy, relatively straightforward tasks, and once the backlogs are cleared the first time, they will become much more manageable categories to keep empty for the future.

I am hoping to focus on

• Category:Images lacking a description which currently has about 10,750 members.
• Category:Images lacking an author which currently has about 5,000 members.
• Category:Articles which may no longer need images which currently has about 6,100 members.
• Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons which currently has about 22,000 members.

I thought these four would be good because they are large number backlogs, so it is easy to see the impact of the work (as opposed to some categories that float around 50 or so members and are cleared and refilled on a daily basis), because they can be done in chunks of any size, even one at a time, and because they are very easy to work on.

I am willing to write up guides, create banners, and help to publicize the backlog, but I want to coordinate it with you guys, as you have experience in backlogs, and I want to use your network of word of mouth encouragement, signpost coverage, and strategic banner spamming to get the word out, attract members, and possibly if you still have Wiki10 loot, bribe "incentivize" people. The work won't get done if no one knows it exists.

Comments, suggestions, and volunteers are welcome. My time frame is flexible and I'm not averse to partnering with any other interested projects, groups or individuals.

Thank you for your consideration, Sven Manguard Wha? 06:46, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Drives scheduled for March, including the contribution team one, have caused me to push this back to April. I am currently in the planning stages for it now, and would love to hear from anyone willing to help with the planning of the drive. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:59, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty to hack a mass-transfer script using my CommonsHelper tool. Of the 22K images in "Copy to Wikimedia Commons", almost 9K seem to be suitable for automatic transfer to Commons (have reasonably complete Information template etc.). So, as of now, I am transferring batches of 50 of those images to Commons, one batch per hour. They will show up here, together with other transfers using CommonsHelper. At this speed, it will take about a week to transfer all 9K images. The script doesn't add NoCommons to the image page here (too lazy to implement, and there are other tools to find/remove duplicates, including this one). The drive can then focus on the remaining ~12K images. --Magnus Manske (talk) 13:54, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Every time you speak, I have an inexplicable urge to hand you a barnstar. Sven Manguard Wha? 18:22, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations#Open investigations

There is a pretty vast backlog at the above project. It is a very important area of work—I wouldn't hesitate to say, more important than many currently listed at the Great Wikipedia Backlog Drive because of the legal concerns involved in copyright violations for the project and the encyclopedia's integrity. I see though that the listings all appear to be by category, with numbers that automatically reduce as the maintenance templates that place the articles in them are removed. There's nothing like that here, so I don't know if there is a fit for the above page in the drive, but that's why I'm here asking you. Can this be added? It is a perpetually backlogged and understaffed area but a vital one.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:48, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a look into how we can incorporate that into the drive. That's definitely a worth cause! All Hail The Muffin Nor does it taste nice... 11:44, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:42, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Any update on this (even if it's "sorry, can't be done")?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:44, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Panyd is on a break, so by the power vested in me by... no one... in the absence of a redaction of her above statement I'd say that it's part of the drive. The aim is to clear backlogs. You're clearing backlogs. Just record the number of clearances that each person does here, preferably separating the "it's good/no changes" from the "it's bad/fix issues" (just in case that becomes important), add the backlog here and if possible here, and if it's part of a Wikiproject, mention that . Assume it's official, and I'm sorry no one got back to you sooner. Sven Manguard Wha? 08:48, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Based on the above (thanks for responding Sven), I've been bold and added it to the list here and the statistics page here even though it's unlike any others--not a category and no automatic counts; I've just listed it as having "thousands", as it does. Hopefully this will get some outside people involved. I have not added to the participants and progress page because that's for someone who bites on the listing deciding to help out in that backlog.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:26, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

University of Nottingham

I'll give the SU an email tomorrow asking about whether it's possible to book one of the Portland concourse lounges for an afternoon. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:06, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Brilliant; thanks! Ironholds (talk) 19:10, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

There's been no response from the SU to my request, and I really don't have the time to try and do anything before the date :/ -mattbuck (Talk) 03:27, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Cats needed

Is there any reason why Category:Uncategorized_pages has been left out? The backlog is currently 6,621 articles, most are new articles and often categorisation will bring them to the attention of projects and editors who are interested in those subjects. So its a good backlog to prioritise, I'm sure I'm not the only editor whose first memory of a positive collaboration with a fellow Wikipedian was when someone categorised an article I wrote. ϢereSpielChequers 11:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

I think it's because that category isn't part of the official backlog template, but we can add it by all means unless there's any objections? The Cavalry (Message me) 14:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

I would guess that it was skipped because it didn't have {{backlog}} on it and so wasn't part of CAT:B. I've added {{backlog}} and agree it's worth making it part of the drive. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:53, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, purely seeing this here has sent me there to clear 45 of them. Harrias ^talk 12:36, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Clarification

I see Category:Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons on the Participants_and_progress page, but not on the Backlogs page. Should I assume that deleting these files counts toward the drive? And am I correct that the drive started 1 Feb?--SPhilbrickT 17:49, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

You are correct on both counts! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 18:34, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

But the tshirt prizes are on a weekly basis, decided every Tuesday, I believe. The Cavalry (Message me) 18:35, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Great Backlog Drive

I've been looking at taking part in the 'Great Backlog Drive' and Im considering having an involvement in the Category:Images_with_inappropriate_JPEG_compression part. Can I reduce the backlog by replace the jpeg with vectors 'svg' for many of the logo's? Thanks Markcoulter50 (talk) 17:28, 14 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markcoulter50 (talk • contribs)

Of course! I see you're a newish user, so you'll be in a different category for the prizes than the experienced users. If you have any questions, just ask here or on any of our talk pages. Remember, you can sign your comments by typing ~~~~ - that way you don;t have to type them yourself. All the best, The Cavalry (Message me) 20:15, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Are you experienced at editing, by the way? You don't have many edits, but you've been around for years! The Cavalry (Message me) 20:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

I edit in fits and start rather than continuously, I don't normally try anything to fancy and have no problem using the 'helpme' tag if there is something Im not sure about. So if you're worried I think Im a pretty safe user. Thanks for your help. Markcoulter50 (talk) 19:20, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not worried at all - I'm just wondering whether we put you in the 'experienced' or 'new' users cat for the t-shirt competition ;-) The Cavalry (Message me) 19:21, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Dead ends

Fixing deadends strikes me as a great way to introduce newbies to editing. But this report Special:DeadendPages which comes up at special pages was last updated in 2009..... ϢereSpielChequers 14:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Updates have been actively disabled; I suggest the devs are the people to talk to. Ironholds (talk) 14:54, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

There's a similar category we'll be using tomorrow, although perhaps Werdna can help us here... The Cavalry (Message me) 19:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

OK yes it is at Category:Dead-end pages. I'd have thought this could be one of the earliest lessons in how to edit wikipedia. Fixing a typo would be an even more basic first lesson and I've now got a volunteer to replace botlaf so I may soon have some pages of articles with probable typos. ϢereSpielChequers 20:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposal to Acquire a Professional Musopen Account for Wikipedia

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.

---

The difference between lossless (top) and lossy (bottom) in images, dramatized. You can tell that both are butterflies, however the quality of the lossless version (top) is much, much higher. The same concept applies in sounds, you can tell what a composition is, but the quality of a lossless track is much, much higher.

Featured Sounds has need of a musopen professional account in order to acquire lossless versions of free use music. There are two purposes to this. First, we aim to replace currently uploaded lossy versions of musopen tracks with lossless versions, and second, we aim to expand the number of lossless files hosted on Commons. In several cases, we have the first part of a several part musical composition, and are in need of the other parts. Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata is one such case, where we have the first of three parts from Musopen, but not the second or third.

Musopen music is all public domian, and the lossy versions of the music hosted there can be accessed for free. However it costs $4 a month $50 a year (which they advertise as $4 a month, but is paid for by the year) to have a professional account, which would allow us to download the lossless versions from Musopen. As you can see by the above link to the Sonata, Wikipedia already uses Musopen as a source of sound files, with no problems.

The difference between lossy and lossless is illustrated in the image to the right. While that is an image, not a sound file, the basic concept remains the same, in that lossless is much better quality.

I believe that this would be a good use of WMF funds, as it meets the Foundation's goals of acquiring a large depository of free use files (i.e. what Commons is) and of improving the quality of articles on Wikipedia (because you can read about the Moonlight Sonata, or you could read about it and listen to it.)

I'm cross posting this on several places where it would be of interest. If the community thinks it's a good idea, we can begin thinking about which budget it comes from and who has access to the account. (To the second point, I would volunteer my time as the/an account holder, and upload from Musopen upon request.)

Thoughts? Sven Manguard Wha? 01:14, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• Nominate and Support Sven Manguard Wha? 01:25, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
• Support Sounds like a good idea! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:26, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
• (Re-adding after comment was deleted) Sounds good, but the money would have to come from the WMF, I think. Still, it'd really help the sounds we've got, and add a nice new media feature to lots of our articles. Two questions: How long would we need the subscription for, and how many files do they have? The Cavalry (Message me) 1:22 am, Today (UTC+0)
  • There are hundreds of pieces (but not thousands), some in multiple parts. The full list can be browsed here. As to how long we would need it, the only option, it appears, is a $50 US a year subscription using paypal. I'm sure we'd pull 50 files from it at least though, possibly multiple times that. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:38, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
• Support - great idea, surprised I wasn't the first to vote. :) —La Pianista ^{♫ ♪} 05:52, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
• So we want to pay for their 'premium service', download all their premium files, and then republish them on a site that anyone can view without any subscription fee at all. How does that fit into their business model? That is, why would/do they allow us to do that? Happy‑melon 10:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

• Seconded - I would like to avoid another National Portrait Gallery but as they offer their listening services for free we may not have that problem. A little clarification would be appreciated. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 14:01, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

• As far as I know, all Musopen works are required to be in the public domain. sonia♫ 19:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

• Yes, all of the works are public domain, we can't steal them. What we're paying for is not the work, as much as the costs of keeping the site afloat. Bandwidth costs money. Moreover they make it explicit that we can do exactly that, as seen in the disclaimer and OTRS ticket that goes with Musopen uploads on Commons (again, link is above.) Sven Manguard Wha? 19:49, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

• They don't have a "business model" - they are a non-profit charity. They charge money for lossless because they can't realistically give away that much bandwidth based on their donation levels. Wikimedia can afford it. Jujutacular ^talk 14:57, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

• Four dollars a month? Are we sure someone doesn't already have a subscription for that cheap? This seems like relatively small money; also, why not make a deal between them and the WMF directly, e.g. pay a one-time fee and they send us their whole collection? /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 03:51, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • I just clarified that, sorry. They actually charge $50 once a year for a whole year, so it's really just advertising. As for the one time fee for the collection, that might work, except for that their collection is growing, so we'd have to have an account to get the new stuff anyways. If we negotiated a partnership, it would have to have a stipulation allowing us free lossless access to the new works as well. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:51, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Before you guys go out and purchase anything, if you're expecting to get reimbursed from the foundation for this, you should clear it first with the appropriate people (Philippe or Christine would be the first level contact, and they can pass it along further if needed). Just sayin', that might be important -- $50 doesn't grow on trees for anyone. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 17:08, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Nothing has been purchased yet. The idea was to gain consensus and then bring it to the budget keepers. Sven Manguard Wha? 21:51, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

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.

Death Anomalies

We only have a small backlog at Wikipedia:Database reports/Living people on EN wiki who are dead on other wikis, but it is the sort of thing we should be aiming to get close to zero. It is also something that we can use newbies in if they have a relevant language - Chinese is our current bottleneck. Could this be incorporated? ϢereSpielChequers 00:27, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't speak the language particularly well, but I know a few people from IRC that do. I'll go ask. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

For present purposes, we can disregard those listed as in zh:Category:下落不明者 and zh:Category:逝世不详. The former is the zhwiki equivalent of Category:Missing people, which isn't a dead people category at all. The latter is unreliable due to extensive misuse of zh:Template:bd on zhwiki on living people. The template is actually for displaying birth/death dates, and it classifies people into that category ("death date unknown") whenever a death date is not specified. T. Canens (talk) 03:46, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I was wondering if it was something like that. I'll see if I can get the bot tweaked. ϢereSpielChequers 09:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I hope all incorect zh categories are removed now. But i think the interwikis of Category:Deaths_by_year should also be fixed. Merlissimo 21:25, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

The Great Backlog Drive

This seems a very curious drive.
The main page states that the drive is underway but gives no starting or finishing dates.
It makes statements about setting big targets but does not say what these are.
It does not identify the projects involved in the 2011 drive.
It makes no reports on progress.
It mentions a weekly competition for best overall competitor and best newcomer but never reports on who the winners are and what they have achieved. (I doubt they exist at all.) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:18, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

You take potshots at a good faith effort to reduce backlogs in poetry form.

Without understanding how much trouble it took to get to this point.

Without bothering to ask anyone involved why things have slowed down.

Without checking all the subpages to make sure you didn't make incorrect statements.

You're being a dick, and you're being a dick to people I consider my friends. Leave. (and don't come back without an attitude change.)

Parallel structure aside, the reality is that the coordinator for this project is sick and has not edited in three weeks, the involved projects list and the progress chart are so easy to find that I'm not going to bother with a direct link, I'll let you find them; (It'll only take five seconds, really.) And just to be clear, insulting people in poetry form is not going to make any of the dozens of users that have spent hundreds of hours on this feel any less insulted. You have your answer, now as I said, I think it's time for you to leave this page. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:29, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

While I like the originality of posting in poetry, asking most of those questions is downright stupid. However, they have a small point. Could somebody in the know put a small statement on the front page... thanking people now that is over and the competition winners will be notified when the coordinator is well again. Personally, I couldn't remember when it ended... judging by people still contributing their numbers, alot don't know when it ends either. I do miss seeing the "muffin is not subtle", always makes me laugh when I see it. Bgwhite (talk) 08:38, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry you are upset by the points I raised above. They are not poetry but were just set out like that to clarify the specific points I was making. I now understand that the project co-ordinator is unwell but that does not reduce the validity of what I wrote. And by the way, I don't think my original post insults anyone and Bgwhite supports some of the points I made.

I joined the drive because of an invitation on the "My watchlist" page which led to here. From the page that link reached, the points I raise seem reasonable enough to me. Point 1 is correct - there are no dates on this page though I do now see that there are on a subpage. Point 2 is correct - what are the specific targets? Point 3 is correct - there was a red wikilink on the main page but someone has today put a redirect there which leads to the 2010 drive. Point 4 is correct - no attempt is made to assess what has been achieved by the drive although figures for individual participants efforts are available. Point 5 is correct - who are the winners, apart from Wikipedia of course? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:05, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

The drive was being mainly organised by Panyd and Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry. However, following their sudden departure, the T-shirts are no longer being awarded, it seems. If I remember correctly, the drive was meant to end some time this month, although I may be mistaken. Regards, Rock drum _Ba-dum^Crash _{(Driving well?)} 16:59, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, Sven but I thought your response was stronger than necessary. I had the same questions, and frankly, came to this thread to ask what was going on. I'm very sorry to hear that someone is ill, but a lot of people put a lot of effort into this drive, and it isn't unreasonable to ask what's going on. The OP statement wasn't condemning, just making reasonable points. --SPhilbrickT 14:59, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Advice wanted for getting interest from students with a table on campus

A request for advice from User:McMormor, a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador in Montana:

---

"In late April, we (Montana State U ambassadors) will be setting up a “wikipedia” table in the student union building next to the primary cafeteria. We will be there with signage and wikipedia handouts from 11-2pm for two days. We will also have our laptops and/or iPads with us. Our primary goal is to find students who want to start a “student wikipedia club.”

Here’s my questions to the group: If anyone else has done this,

1. What quantities of wikipedia stuff did you actually handout?
2. What types of strategies did you use to get the students involved?
3. Do you have any lessons learned that we should know about?"

---

I thought Contrib Team people involved with the UK university events might have some good advice for her.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:13, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

We were working on about 80 leaflets per event, iirc. Lessons learned - a surprising number of people thought that you had to be specially selected to work on the project, or were unaware that you could even edit, strange as it may sound. You might want to factor that in to how you explain things to them. Ironholds (talk)

I spent an afternoon at the event at Imperial with my netbook and online access via mobile broadband. Unfortunately it was the day of some mediawiki update which rather messed up the work I did, but I still think it useful to have PCs and wikipedians present so you can discuss articles and editing with individuals and ideally get someone to make that all important first edit. ϢereSpielChequers 15:46, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

New Pages and New Users

I've recently been doing some thinking (and a great deal of consultation with Philippe and James at the WMF's community department) on how to keep new users around and participating, particularly in light of Sue's March update. One of the things we'd like to test is whether the reception they get when they make their first article is key. In a lot of cases, people don't stay around; their article is deleted and that's that. By the time any contact is made, in other words, it's often too late.

What we're thinking of doing is running a project to gather data on if this occurs, how often it occurs, and so on, and in the mean time try to save as many pages (and new contributors) as possible. Basically, involved users would go through the deletion logs and through Special:NewPages looking for new articles which are at risk of being deleted, but could have something made of them - in other words, non-notable pages that are potentially notable, or spammy pages that could be rewritten in more neutral language. This would be entirely based on the judgment of the user reviewing pages - no finnicky CSD standards. These pages would be incubated instead of deleted, and the creator contacted and shepherded through how to turn the article into something useful. If they respond and it goes well, we have a decent article and maybe a new long-term editor. If they don't respond, the draft can be deleted after a certain period of time.

I know this isn't necessarily your standard fare, but with this project's main focus being on getting new people involved, individual editors might find it intriguing. If you're interested, read Wikipedia:Wiki Guides/New pages, sign up and get involved; questions can be dropped on the talkpage or directed at me. Regards, Ironholds (talk) 21:52, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

highlighting people's work in backlog drive.

I know of the special circumstances involved in this year's contest. But, it would be a good idea to at least handout barnstars and thank yous for the people who worked hard during this year's contest. Acknowledging people's work would hopefully bring them back next year or have them continue thru the year. I don't want this to look like I'm begging for a barnstar, so please, don't hand out anything to me. Bgwhite (talk) 06:05, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

We've been sending t-shirts out - I think Sage and Steven at the WMF are working on the last few. Ironholds (talk) 06:14, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm aware of a few people who made a quite a few contributions that have heard nothing. I made ~17,000 of the 33,000 edits and have heard nothing. I've just looked at 15 semi-random talk pages and nothing about the backlog drive. Bgwhite (talk) 08:22, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Barnstars are nice and even important to some people. T-shirts are nice but involve postage and such. Even name recognition is nice, would be appreciated by almost everyone and only costs a few keystrokes. JimCubb (talk) 16:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

• Again, Bgwhite, Sage and Steven.. etc. I'll do my best to put something together when I have a free moment. Ironholds (talk) 18:46, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank You. I'm sure alot of people will appreciate what you will do. Bgwhite (talk) 20:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)