Wikipedia talk:Good article reassessment/Sweeps 2023

Move

Phlsph7, do you mind if I move this into Wikipedia-space? I think it's good enough to make a start. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29: Please go ahead, I'm happy that this gets started. Phlsph7 (talk) 19:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Priority levels

How are we determining what is high-priority and what ain't? Hog Farm _Talk 01:54, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your own opinion. Trust your judgement, I guess? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 07:53, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. I would say it depends on how severe the problems are. If the article fails the GA criteria by a lot, it's high priority. If it barely fails the GA criteria, it's low priority. If a long article is of good quality except for a few short unreferenced paragraphs, I would say it's low priority. However, if a short article has the same number of unreferenced paragraphs, it may be high priority. Maybe we could add something along those lines to the description. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:25, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we should prescribe too precisely; I trust all our judgements, and no-one's going to mark a high-priority article as satisfactory. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:35, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the important point is whether a GAR is needed or not. The priority is secondary. Phlsph7 (talk) 12:59, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Update needed

@Phlsph7 and AirshipJungleman29: - any hope of getting this updated? I've been offwiki for most of the past two months but this doesn't seem to have been maintained. I can help update some later this week but can't make any promises about how much time I'll have. Hog Farm _Talk 16:06, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder. I updated the list with all recent delisted articles. I hope I got all. I'm not sure if there is an easy way to find all articles that were kept rather than being delisted to update that part of the overview. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:27, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Phlsph7: - Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Archive 72 and Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Archive 73 should have the listings you need. Hog Farm _Talk 15:36, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Phlsph7 (talk) 16:09, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RL meant I couldn't contribute as much as I wanted, and then the ongoing von Neumann debacle sapped most of my will to work at GAR. I'll probably come back to this, but I don't know when. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:48, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29, @Hog Farm. Sorry for butting in. But it seems that the list is difficult to find certain articles may be improved. Should they be classified by the fields to look easier to find? Dedhert.Jr (talk) 04:08, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dedhert.Jr, unfortunately I don't know if a way to sort by GA subtopic could be programmed, and whether it would worth it, as there are only 250 articles left. For the mathmatics ones you'll be interested in, I spot: Sylvester's sequence, Fleiss' kappa, Srinivasa Ramanujan, Newton's theorem of revolving orbits, Mathematical economics, Mayer–Vietoris sequence, Maximum spacing estimation, Fast inverse square root, Matrix (mathematics), and Hilbert space. That's ten articles; feel free to work on one at a time, or to note which ones you don't think you can work on.

Note however that the script used to generate the table can't account for WP:CALC, so some articles may need no citations, or just very minor additions. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 04:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29 I have no idea where should I start, considering if I'm not experties in some fields. Currently, Sylvester's sequence is on the way to add inline citations, but I have to ask the main author and nominator first. The article Newton's theorem of revolving orbits is not mathematics article, but it is physics (you could ask WP:PHY, if they are favor in). Mathematical economics may be the part of mathematics and economics; you could ask WP:WPM and WP:ECO to improve it, if they are favor in. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 04:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Start wherever you feel comfortable, Dedhert.Jr; there is no deadline. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 04:40, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, except the deadline will appears by nominating to GAR, it could have be tiresome while I'm busying other articles. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 04:51, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You could use the column Comments to indicate that you are working on an article or plan to. This way, if someone considers a GAR nomination, they may consult you first. Phlsph7 (talk) 06:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29, @Phlsph7 Thanks. By the way, how do I remove the article that is not needed to nominate in GAR? I think the article Sylvester's sequence is entirely sourced, with an exception for the examples. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 13:04, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can do that by removing its column from the table "Open entries" and adding a new column "Kept or no GAR needed". Phlsph7 (talk) 13:15, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Halfway mark

@Phlsph7, Hog Farm, and Z1720: we have reached the halfway mark; of the original 380, more than 190 have been assessed or taken to GAR. Good work. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:57, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]