User talk:Tony1/Most poorly wikilinked article award

Impending announcement: silliest wikilink of the month awards

Users are advised that His Grace the Duke of Waltham has agreed to be the inaugural judge of the Silliest wikilink of the month awards. There will be five monthly winners (August–December 2009) and an overall winner for 2009.

His Grace will make the announcement at WT:LINK when He is ready. The Duke's private secretary, Harold Cartwright, has emphasised that no correspondence will be entered into regarding the awards: His Grace's decision will be final. Tony (talk) 23:46, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Highlight winners?

Perhaps bold or italics should be used to highlight the winners for each month as well as the annual winner. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:47, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

His Grace has instructed that the months be put in reverse chronological order and that the winners be listed beneath each month table. I shall do this soon. Tony (talk) 09:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

One thing for sure

I always find something nominated here that makes me laugh like hell. "shoes" had me in hysterics! :) --Brad (talk) 12:33, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Inactive?

March has not been decided, and it's July. Kayau Voting IS evil 14:43, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I hope its not inactive; its highly amusing (and a bit depressing). Ceoil (talk) 17:49, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Maybe we should find a new 'judge'. Kayau Voting IS evil 02:53, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, sorry, you are quite right to voice concerns. We've lost our judge, His Grace, who is rarely online nowadays. He did warn me a couple of months ago. I will try to find a new judge. Tony (talk) 09:48, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Announcement: new judge

Friends, it is with disappointment that I announce that His Grace the Duke of Waltham is no longer able to judge the monthly awards. Real-life pressures and connection issues have severely restricted his activities on WP. I want to thank him for his work on this page, and to express my hope that he will return to full activity before long.

However, we are indeed lucky: Ceoil has agreed to be our new judge. He is a relatively uninvolved editor, with a fine record of producing and reviewing featured articles. There is a backlog of awards, so we might expect Ceoil to announce these awards over the next week or two. It is important to remind ourselves of the purpose of the scheme: to promote and recognise excellence in linking practice. Like good prose, such excellence is increasingly important to retaining WP's stellar position on the Internet. Tony (talk) 05:39, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Is there a Silliest un-wikilink list?

Is there a Silliest un-wikilink list? Regards, Human. 99.29.185.86 (talk) 23:01, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

You mean silly external links. There are TONS of those! Kayau Voting IS evil 02:34, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Still backlogged

Six weeks after Ceoil took over as judge, there are still three months going back to May that have yet to be judged. What's going on? Alzarian16 (talk) 09:48, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

I'll email Ceoil and make headings underneath those tables in preparation. Tony (talk) 10:49, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

I didn't realise, am on it. Ceoil (talk) 04:25, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Major announcement

Our judge, Ceoil, will soon announce the winners for August, July and May 2010, and at the end of this month will announce the winner for September.

He has agreed that we might then change the focus of the competition from individual wikilinks and small groups of wikilinks to whole articles that are badly overlinked. Inevitably, those valuable editors who perform gnoming services are confronted with overlinking throughout whole articles (particularly of "dictionary" items). In almost all cases, this has arisen earlier in WP's history, when there was no coherent strategy for maximising the utility of the wikilinking system. It's a lot of work to clean it up, and the Silliwilli awards was set up to encourage this work.

Therefore, we have decided that from October 2010 onwards the awards should be judged in terms of whole articles. Competitors will still be asked to list individual links (but expanded to six of the funniest, most useless, most inexplicable individual links in the article, as an example of the entry); however, the removal of overlinking from the whole article will be the sole determinant in the award. We expect this will reduce the number of entrants each month, which will compensate for the extra work by the judge in analysing the entries. Tony (talk) 04:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Confusing as hell

I just don't understand the table in this article. What do the different sections mean? I clicked and still couldn't figure it out. Yours in frustration, sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 03:58, 12 September 2010 (UTC)