Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives/November 2016

Neutral Point of View done by GoCE?

Is an article with the NPOV tag eligible for a Copyedit tag with "tone" as the problem, or is this beyond the scope of GoCE efforts? I could cite an example, but please answer the general question. I will not apply the tag until the November drive, if eligible for Copy editing.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 00:15, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

I would say no. "Tone" as a copyediting issue would refer to things like overly informal language. NPOV is a separate thing, which is why it merits its own tag. Tdslk (talk) 15:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

I thought I had responded to this question, but I do not see my edit in the history. Sorry about that. FWIW, I find that when articles are tagged for copy editing, regardless of the stated reason, they usually need some copy editing. If an article is tagged as such, I will edit it. If an article is tagged with copyedit and NPOV, I will edit it and then read through to see if it seems NPOV to me. If it does, I will remove both tags. I hope that helps. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:52, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Sahrawi Association of Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations Committed by the Moroccan State (376 words) is the article I would like to see done.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 01:22, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Erin Bow

Please copyedit Erin Bow, I cannot do it promptly, and an AfD is pending.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 01:19, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

It seems to me that it would be better to let this article settle for a bit (it has 100 edits in the last ten days) so that a copy edit will have some lasting effect. If the AfD decision is "delete" due to lack of notability, the copy-editing effort will be for nought. I may be missing something, however. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:04, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh, but I sometimes want to keep an article, and look for ways to improve it right away. Let it go for a fortnight, and check it then. It should not be deleted, but who knows?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 00:09, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Erin Bow was kept after the AfD, more improvements were made, but it still needs copyediting.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 17:07, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Erin Bow is being expanded and rewritten, and is no longer tagged for copyediting.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 13:31, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Copyedit on The Doctor (Doctor Who)

I wanted to try a 10k article and so copyedited The Doctor (Doctor Who) from the requests page. I figured the drive would give me plenty of time to work on it, and (though a former FA) it's currently B-class which felt about right for my competency. I know it wasn't a grade-A job, but I've started discussion on the article talk page and will work with the article's editors on the unresolved issues. I just want to be up-front that I'll understand if it has to be deducted for not being up to standards. (That and I don't want to do another 10k this month, phew!) - Reidgreg (talk) 02:03, 4 November 2016 (UTC) I decided to deduct 6,600 words for sections with maintenance tags that are not 100% resolved. The requester and from an established editor with the associated WikiProject have given positive feedback on the copyedit.

One copyedit I would like reviewed is "Pest of the West#Plot summary". I didn't realize at the time it was a GA (the only one on my list). It's about 400 words, and I'd appreciate a check on it. Thanks. Reidgreg (talk) 13:45, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Took a quick look and it seems okay to me. One thing I'd do is add a comma after "desert" in "SpongeBuck gets kicked away to a desert where he meets Pecos Patrick Star". I don't overuse commas, but one seems appropriate there. All the best, Miniapolis 21:07, 9 November 2016 (UTC) Y Done, thanks! Reidgreg (talk) 12:55, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Last call

The November copy editing drive has ended. Please make any final edits to your article lists and the leaderboard (it is not updated automatically) in the next 24 hours or so. It is OK to edit your section of the page, and the leaderboard, even though the page is archived.

Barnstars will be distributed in the next few days. Thanks to everyone who participated. We eliminated the two oldest months, and we got the total backlog count to a new record low! – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:26, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Awesome drive

Drive editors knocked the total way down. We pushed the backlog down by >500 and offset the November influx of >170. Each year in November and May I hit the shorties, but this time (more so than usual) the total went down by way more than the shortie total. You guys rock! Lfstevens (talk) 08:48, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Well done, everyone! This was great fun. This was my first drive and I felt a lot of support from the community here, working toward a common purpose. I noticed multiple editors were checking on the work of newcomers (like myself) and appreciate that. It's a bit boggling to think that the backlog was once above 8k articles, and I'm hugely impressed with those who've stuck with this over the years. Reidgreg (talk) 17:17, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. We did a great job! I processed about 80 articles, usually copy-editing, but sometimes removing tags after determining that an article had already been fixed by other editors, or applying speedy delete or prod tags to articles that dropped out of the backlog once they were deleted. I also find it satisfying to take a chunk out of the backlog by looking for {{awkward}} and {{copy edit inline}}, which usually mean a quick fix.

Our normal count of new tagged articles is about 300, so keeping November 2016 at 170 means that we processed about 130–150 recently tagged articles during the drive. Overall, we dropped the backlog by 523 articles, and with 170 November articles at the end of the month, that means we processed about 523+170+130 articles, well over 800. Amazing.

P.S. Lfstevens is modest, but they copy-edited over half of this month's articles! – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:08, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Holy crow! So he's claimed less than one word for every four articles copyedited. (I didn't think there were enough articles claimed on the drive compared to what was being cleared from the backlog.) I got a little competitive on the leaderboard and claimed almost all of the articles I copyedited, pretty much the inverse proportion. Optimistically, I have to count what I can before the backlog is completely cleared! Reidgreg (talk) 16:20, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations to Lfstevens on his almost unsung effort. Seeing his entry on the drive page I thought that he was slacking.

Speaking of {{awkward}} and {{copy edit inline}} and such, this drive was the first where I encountered the former tag, without the usual {{copyedit}} tag anywhere (at List of Sultans of Sulu). It took me awhile to figure out that there are these other tags that cause articles to appear at Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit, where those tags are listed. It might be helpful to list them also on the guild and drive home pages. Dhtwiki (talk) 01:19, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

The other tags that add articles to the copy edit category are {{awkward}}, {{copy edit section}}, {{copy edit inline}}, and {{spacing}}. I have added them to the documentation for {{copyedit}}, to the main Guild page, and to the template that is used to create new drives. Good suggestion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:40, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

You all came within 22 articles of reducing the backlog to under a year. That's amazing! I'm looking forward to seeing that one-year goal fall in January, since only 139 tagged articles remain today from January 2016 and before, far fewer than the number of "old" articles that were completed in this past drive. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:35, 4 December 2016 (UTC)