Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortcut: WT:ASSESS

Archives
2006 2007 2008A 2008B

Contents 1 Proposed colour changes for Merge, Category & Template-Class 2 Is it Possible ... 3 Template:Good Article 4 A-class?? 5 Proposed addition to assessment table

[edit] Proposed colour changes for Merge, Category & Template-Class

Following on from the above, I have made a proposal to adjust the colours used for Merge, Category and Template-Class. Discussion can be found here. PC78 (talk) 17:40, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Is it Possible ...

It is relatively easy to view all articles for a Project by either class or importance. But is it possible to view a category of articles by both: e.g., Christianity articles that are class:Start, Importance: High? Athanasius • Quicumque vult 20:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it is. WP:CHINA already does that, as you can see from Category:Top-importance China-related articles, for instance. It just means some serious alterations to a project's banner to accomodate it. John Carter (talk) 20:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Big task to be sure - I know that banners have certainly grown into things that I don't want to mess with, for fear of breaking the darn thing. Some point down the road, however, that should probably become a standard. It just makes it much easier to identify and priorititize where work is most needed. Athanasius • Quicumque vult 20:33, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

The new WP1.0 bot will be integrated with the toolserver and will be able to provide intersections like this dynamically, for all projects, with no need for on-wiki changes. Eventually :D Happy‑melon 22:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

That will make things much easier. Eventually. Thanks for the info. Athanasius • Quicumque vult 00:01, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe that CBM will be getting this new bot running this spring or summer - also including lots of other nifty features! Walkerma (talk) 02:29, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Good Article

{{Good Article}} has been nominated for deletion. See WP:TFD.

76.66.202.139 (talk) 10:02, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] A-class??

I'm not quite clear on what "A-class" means. 1) There don't seem to be many A-class articles. 2) I've seen articles that say, "_____ is a former Featured Article", and they're always GA-class. 3) The few A-class articles I've seen appear to be on the same level, quality-wise, as Good Articles. 74.33.174.133 (talk) 20:29, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

We had a big debate on clarifying the issue earlier in the year. Once our group has time to work on it - after the release of Version 0.7 - we will work on that. The short answer is - it depends how the assessment was reached, by the GA reviewers or by an internal WikiProject review system. The former tends more to address style issues, where the latter can focus more on specialist knowledge of content. Walkerma (talk) 01:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe that a majority of A-class articles come from the Military History WikiProject; more information can be found at our project A-class criteria and our project A-class review. The normal Wikipedia A-class guidelines (non-MILHIST) can be found here. Cheers! —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 04:46, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed addition to assessment table

I propose a new column for articles that are tagged for needing immediate attention. Crash Underride 18:27, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Can you give us some idea how many projects currently use that classification? Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 01:36, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Wouldn't that be better handled by content tags, rather than talk page assessments? It's much more likely to be noticed that way, and it then serves the dual purpose of warning readers of the issue until it's resolved. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 04:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

My idea was to add it to the table because I include the assessment table in every issue of the projects newsletter. Each time the bot is run and re-organizes the numbers for the columns, etc. it's not only automatically updates on the project page, but the newsletter as well. Crash Underride

Sorry I was so slow to reply, I got deep into final exams and so on, and didn't check back until now. Can you solve the problem by using the subst command? I had a similar problem with transcluding a template for our collaboration, and Subst solved that nicely.

As for articles that need immediate attention, if there are specific cleanup tags on an article page, we could consider adding a column to the "list by quality" pages that indicates this (similar to the way we currently indicate articles included in Version 0.5). Would that be a useful feature? Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 07:15, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, have a look at the bottom of the up coming newsletter. I place a link at the bottom by the table. As for the the subst command, I'm afraid that I'd jack somethin' up. I'm paranoid like that. My idea was to add a new column that was for the ones that needed immediate attention, and have them grouped like they are by priority and class. Crash Underride 07:26, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, that clarifies things a lot - thanks. Let's see if any of the tech people respond here - if not, I'll post some questions. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 07:40, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I hate duplicated effort, so I'll go ahead and ask: How is this different from the work that User:WolterBot does? (c.f. Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones/Cleanup listing) Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 03:19, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

It's different because I'm talkin' about havin' a new column placed on the table. Not a listing made. I've already created the project category. Crash Underride 16:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... if there were a way of listing article talk pages in that category, we could certainly treat is as a "review category", similar to what we do with Category:Wikipedia featured articles and Category:Wikipedia good articles. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 06:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Could that be done in the second generation bot, do you think? Walkerma (talk) 07:16, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Depends on how it is done. If we have a large category that encompasses all articles with cleanup tags, then it's a matter of adding one line of code. If there's a category for each WikiProject, it becomes considerably more painful. However, both are possible. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 07:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Titoxd, however I know jack about the codes for the bots, lol. Crash Underride 19:36, 25 June 2009 (UTC)