Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikify/Drives/2011/February

"Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much." ― H.E.

Pre-drive planning

Pre-drive planning for the February drive is underway at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikify#February drive. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 21:49, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Drive already started... WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 04:45, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note the date of my first post. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 19:48, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I recongnize that. On an unrelated note, please address the concern[s] here about your GAN. WikiCopter (♠ • ♣ • ♥ • ♦ • simple • commons • lost • cvu • onau) 23:02, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Word count help

I've followed the instructions for counting words, but I find that some of my articles end up with fewer words following wikification. For example, if I wikify a sentence into a list, this no longer counts as words using the suggested tool. (eg St Olave's Church, Southwark). Also, I tend to prune flowery language down, so can I count the negative word change as my "score"? welsh (talk) 22:48, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are actually supposed to get the word count before you wikify the article, because of this very problem. Just take note of the words, wikify, and give yourself credit for that amount. Nolelover^{It's football season!} 23:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but I did run the tool (after the event) on the version of the article prior to to my edits. welsh (talk) 23:14, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

...and that should be the correct count! :) Anything else I can help you with? Nolelover^{It's football season!} 23:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've not done this before, and the instructions aren't totally clear. What I'm hearing is that the wordcount of the article before it is wikified is what should be recorded in the log. I had assumed it was the difference in the wordcounts that was being measured - ie the amount of change, not the size of the article. Please clarify. welsh (talk) 13:17, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, it's not the difference, it's the word count. The reasoning is that this will encourage users to wikify larger articles, which are obviously more difficult to wikify. Personally, I use CatScan to find the smallest articles, so that way I can do more articles. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 14:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Got it! Thanks. welsh (talk) 14:42, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. :) Guoguo12 --Talk-- 14:46, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and don't forget to change all of your log entries to reflect the correct word count. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 14:49, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merging

I don't know if anyone is checking up on what we are doing in this wikification drive, but in the course of dealing with Turkmen in Syria I wikified it first, then merged the article into Syrian Turks, a merger proposal that had been outstanding for some time. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:06, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since the prose that you wikified was also merged, I assume you would take credit for the 156 words that was Turkmen in Syria before you wikified it. Nolelover^{It's football season!} 13:49, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Graphs

The graphs on drive progress haven't auto updated for several days. I think seeing progress visually would be an encouragement! Can this be fixed? welsh (talk) 12:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the graphs. The unfortunate truth is that the graphs do not "auto update"; they have to be done manually. Sorry for the delay. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 14:39, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK! Thank you for your manual intervention then! welsh (talk) 15:19, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

Unfortunately the browser I have to use during the day (when I have time to wikify) does not allow the word count script to work, thus making my participation in this drive prohibitively difficult. I have removed myself from the log page. Best of luck! Cjmclark ^(Contact) 14:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks anyway. Happy editing! :) Guoguo12 --Talk-- 20:02, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll be in my cave, disambiguating. Cjmclark ^(Contact) 21:20, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2008 tag goal

Since there are only a few days left in the drive, and the 18000 tag goal is a long way off, perhaps a suggestion for participants to work on the 2008 tags would help to accomplish one of the goals of the drive, the elimination of those 08 tags. There are still 230+ articles tagged from 08, so a big push is needed to completely eliminate them, especially because they tend to be a bit longer or challenging, and because Feb. is s short month :) . Just a thought. Nihola (talk) 17:37, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 23:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some thoughts at the end of the drive

Although a total of 905 articles wikified during the drive might be thought of as being a little disappointing, it must be judged in the light of articles that were given "Wikify" tags during the month of February. This number was 1749 (plus any that have already been dealt with). So that gives a total number of articles wikified during the drive as 2650+ . The articles outstanding since 2008 came down from 745 to 190 which I think is impressive. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, what you've said is all true. The drive was generally a success, especially in reducing the 2008 backlog. Stats here. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 21:24, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]