Okay, so the main page looks better than it did a couple of days ago, especially once I removed the inactive template...ha ha. Anyway, there's still clean up to be done, and if anyone would like to post suggestions of improvements to the main page, how to get things organize...speak up! --Son (talk) 17:48, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
It could be fleshed out a bit more. Some sections that have only like one sentence could be expanded to multiple paragraphs. The Game Show infobox might be too confusing, I don't know if that should be done. A regular Television infobox does a good enough job, a game show version would pretty much be no different at all. I also think that we should try to recruit other people, now that this project is getting up and running. And try to flesh out the members who haven't been in the project for awhile. I like the idea of getting people to fully sign their name when they join. The scope could be expanded. The title section is useless, I think. Descendent projects will be GREAT later on... I can imagine The Price is Right being the one descendent project that'll be needed when we have more members. The hierachy section might not be needed. The goals needs major expansion. Same for Projects and Tasks. The Adopt a Article section looks fine, but we might not want to do that until we get more members, especially ones who know how to add sources and citations, since that's what Good Article and Featured Article reviewers are now pretty much looking for. The infoboxes section needs clean-up. Same for the categories section. Everything else looks fine. FamicomJL (talk) 20:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with how game show articles are currently organized, but one of the first things we should do here is set up a structure that is the same or similar to the current layout of articles under the scope of this project. As for editors that know how to add citations... I can't speak for most of the participants but I can assure you that Son, Scott5114, and myself (through our experience at WP:USRD) are accustomed to adding reliable citations to articles, so that won't be a problem. We (in my opinion) also need to clarify the scope a little more - are we including articles models on game shows (such as the one on former The Price Is Right model Janice Pennington) within our project? The scope given right now seems like it covers these articles (which is correct IMO), but I'm unsure, hence why I haven't tagged the articles on Barker's Beauties yet. --TMFLet's Go Mets - Stats09:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
I tend to think that anything related to game shows is under the project banner, so go ahead and tag the articles on Barker's Beauties. I added the tag to The Paley Center for Media, and to game show hosts. And good to here people who can do citations are in this group besides me. This will make the article collaborations of the week MUCH easier to do. FamicomJL (talk) 21:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm fine with that, I just hope it's not too overwhelming.
I have created this icon for the Project Banner. It is currently saved as a jpeg image, because I was having trouble converting to an SVG file. I have a post on the Graphics Lab page to get assistance. What do you think?—Twigboy (talk) 04:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I made this one a week ago and forgot to post it here. It's an SVG with a DoND case, a Free Spin from WoF, a TPiR price tag, and a signalling device intended to represent Jeopardy!. Could probably use polish (shanding and such) by someone who's actually an artist.—Scott5114↗[EXACT CHANGE ONLY]05:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
The idea of combining effects from different shows seems pretty cool. I actually like both, but I'd use Scott's for the logo of the project, and find another use for Twigboy's. --Son (talk) 00:54, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I was on the page for Duel, and saw that Son has assessed it as "Current" class on the quality scale. I think that's a great idea. Maybe we should make it so that shows that are less than a few months old get that as their quality scale ranking, or something like that? What do you guys think? FamicomJL (talk) 05:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Current/Future is used as a stability indicator in other projects. If the article is more than stub, but is subject to wholesale revisions, then Current applies, because the assessment could change for better or for worse in a short span. I don't think that current should remain for very long. In the instance of Duel, it should likely be classed appropriately once the first round of episodes is complete.—Twigboy (talk) 15:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Ah, the Current-class assessment. I chose that because I felt there was no better tag to use. I could tag it as Start-class, but given that only 2 episodes have aired, I thought that the tag didn't fit. My thought on the Current-class is that it would only apply to game shows that are in its first season. Beyond the first season, the article should be stable enough to get a standard Start-class, B-class, whatever rating.
As for the Future-class, I'm not sure there's much use for it in our project. It's better applied in films and video games that have long-term developments and periodic announcements. --Son (talk) 00:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Didn't know that there was such a thing as "current-class" until I saw this. Now that I've seen it, my position is that it should only be used on articles that are too volatile/unstable to get a fair quality rating. Once it stables out, then replace it with a standard class assessment. --TMFLet's Go Mets - Stats01:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Just to clarify, I believe tagging Current-class for Duel (US game show) was appropriate, since the game itself has yet to run its course once from start to finish. Because it is not a complete article, and "stub" was clearly not appropriate, it could not receive a letter grade pending the completion of the article. If after the completion of one game cycle the article still needs work, then Start would apply. As for Future, it doesn't really differ from Current, as it's just a stability flag. For example, you could class Amnesia (game show) as future. Oh snap! Redlink? We've got some work to do :) —Twigboy (talk) 04:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I've found that a number of projects use a Current-class. If you go to WP:TVGS/A, I added Current-class based off what the Comics project uses as their standard. I suppose a Future-class could be added. --Son (talk) 06:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Watch out, Betacommandbot's about
Just a friendly note to those of you working on this project to double-check screencaps placed on your favorite shows' articles. Articles missing a fair-use rationale can be tagged by Betacommandbot, and if a rationale isn't provided, they'll be deleted. Watch for the bot and fix the rationales should an image get tagged! —Scott5114↗[EXACT CHANGE ONLY]08:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Regarding Pyramid (game show), that article is currently a mess. Do you think that you could help by trimming some of the cruft (we don't need to know about the joke Winner's Circle on the last ep of $20K, funny as it was) and re-adding some info on how the game is actually played? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)04:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, the article is a MAJOR trivia induced mess... but atleast it looks better than it did a few months ago. A lot of the cruft is gone, at least. I actually think adding references for the article might be your best bet right now. And Yeah, I really don't know why the guy prodded the gameplay article without asking us if we wanted to take any of the info and trim it for the main article. Best we can do is get someone who really knows the game well, and can sum it up in a few paragraphs or less. FamicomJL (talk) 16:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable)21:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Articles flagged for cleanup
Currently, 208 articles are assigned to this project, of which 95, or 45.7%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place the following template on your project page:
{{User:WolterBot/Cleanup listing subscription|banner=WikiProject TV Game Shows}}
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot23:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Userbox and newsletter?
Can someone create a Userbox for this group? Also, like most WikiProject groups I'm a member of, they usually give out newsletters to users' Talkpages who are members of the group at least once a month. Can someone be in charge of providing a newsletter providing important dates in game show history and as well as project progress? Thanks, WM-8613:42, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
This article doesn't look at its best to me; it is not within any WikiProject scopes. Its talk page only consists of an unsigned question from July 2008. The article also has an empty 'References' section. Can this be trimmed up a bit? SchfiftyThree(talk!)22:10, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
