Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used

AFI Scheduling (automated checklist)

Item	This week	Next week	Week after
1. Weekly page created
2. Article specified
3. Picture/file chosen
4. Caption written
It is currently week 8 of 2025. Purge this page to refresh the checklist.

AFI Scheduling (automated checklist)

Item	This week	Next week	Week after
1. Weekly page created
2. Article specified
3. Picture/file chosen
4. Caption written
It is currently week 8 of 2025. Purge this page to refresh the checklist.

I've come up with a new schedule list page that doesn't require human or bot maintenance each week to update: Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Schedule/new (to replace Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Schedule/real). I have also made a task checklist that will check if the weekly tasks, required for the templates and bot to work correctly, have been completed. If you guys like them, they should be fairly easy to put into use. - Evad37 [talk] 10:52, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant. I was actually wondering if I was setting things up right for the bot. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 14:09, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User:Evad37! Northamerica1000^(talk) 18:32, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - Evad37 [talk] 03:50, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have proposed both a move and a merge on the talk page, input would be welcome. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 05:33, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's been eight weeks now since we've switched to the one-per-week format – some stats and links to before and after revisions are available on the accomplishments page. So what does everyone think – what works well, what isn't working so well, and do we want to change anything? - Evad37 [talk] 12:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Northamerica1000 and CaroleHenson:, @Kvng, Whiteghost.ink, ChrisGualtieri, and Ypnypn:, @Moswento, Kvng, Coin945, and Hmlarson:, @WaitingForConnection, Evad37, Sumanah, and Buffbills7701:, @Newyorkadam and Simplysavvy: - Evad37 [talk] 06:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I'll start us off by saying that I don't think the nomination procedure is working well. I think a "3 supports" system needs broader participation than what the page currently receives – the vast majority of recent nominations seem to be unsuccessful - this single bot edit [1] archived 15 items, most of which had 1 support and no opposes. Given that there is now human involvement in the scheduling of articles, perhaps articles that don't receive any oppose votes after 2 or 3 weeks should also be put in the holding area. - Evad37 [talk] 12:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the nomination system needs to be looked at, sine it was designed when we were scheduling in 10 article lumps. The idea with the 3 supports was that we needed a filter, but voting for the top 3 of 10 not only seems to be increasing participation, but also providing a good filter on our process before it goes public. Plus, the voting is fun and keep people coming back here week to week.

As far as participation, I think over all there has been an increase in both quality and quantity of improvements. However, I would request that all of us make some change to the article when it is on for the week, no matter how trivial. The more watchlist blips we get, the more likely we are to attract other drive-by editors. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 18:13, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For me, the voting created my initial involvement and my subsequent interest. What you have created with this project is much like a classroom setting where someone like me can watch the development of a specific article, participate when possible and, most importantly, learn how a Wikipedia article gets built from the ground up. It has great potential as a teaching tool for new editors. Watching the changes at Nordic art and working with a group of focused editors will be an opportunity for me to improve my editing skills. ```Buster Seven Talk 20:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Buster7, how did you find TAFI? ~KvnG 14:00, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really remember. It was a year ago. I'm a Wikipedia Wanderer so I probably saw the open door and looked in. ```Buster Seven Talk 21:07, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you are doing one-a-week then the name 'today's article for improvement' is misleading. GiantSnowman 14:11, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The messages sent weekly to participants to inform them of the article chosen uses the same header – This week's article for improvement – every week. This means that multiple sections on the page share the same heading, which causes problems with linking. For example, the following appeared on my watchlist:

• (diff | hist) . . b User talk:Ypnypn‎; 01:54 . . (+1,713)‎ . . MediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)‎ (→‎This week's article for improvement: new section)

However, clicking on the arrow took me to the post for several weeks ago.

To solve this problem, I think we should include in each heading either the date or the week number, just like the Signpost does. -- Ypnypn (talk) 02:44, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How about "This week's article for improvement (week W, YYYY)", substituting W and YYYY with the current week and year? - Evad37 [talk] 03:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That would work great! - Ypnypn (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Buster7, Northamerica1000, NickPenguin, and CaroleHenson:, @Kvng, Whiteghost.ink, ChrisGualtieri, and Ypnypn:, @Moswento, Kvng, Coin945, and Hmlarson:, @WaitingForConnection, Evad37, Sumanah, and Buffbills7701:, @Newyorkadam, Simplysavvy, Tomásdearg92, and Wikiuser13:, and others:

The following articles have been randomly chosen from the holding area:

• Catchiness
• Ruler
• Lowest common denominator
• Anubis
• Encyclopedia
• Toy Story (franchise)
• Wrecking ball
• Human skeleton
• Party
• Oscar speech

Please indicate, before 23:59 UTC Saturday, your top three preferences in order: your top pick first, then your second choice, and then your third. These will be allocated 3, 2, and 1 points respectively, and the most popular article (with the most points) will be added to the scheduled for week 9 of 2014. Articles that receive at least one vote will be returned to the holding area, while articles with no votes will be archived. On behalf of the TAFI project, - Evad37 [talk] 04:26, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Toy Story (franchise) -Newyorkadam (talk) 04:30, 9 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]
• Anubis, Human skeleton, Oscar speech. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 07:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Human skeleton,Lowest common denominator,Anubis Simplysavvy (talk) 09:15, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• oscar speech, human skeleton catchiness, ruler--Coin945 (talk) 10:49, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• party, ruler, LCD. - Ypnypn (talk) 17:22, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Anubis, Ruler, Lowest common denominator -- Tomásdearg92 (talk) 19:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Wrecking ball, Oscar speech and Party. Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:11, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Lowest common denominator, Human skeleton, Party - C679 20:18, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! My article nomination (Encyclopedic dictionary) got it's 4th vote on February 4th, and later same day it was said to be moved by Theo's little bot to the holding area[2]. I was just wondering if any of you guys know when will it be visible there at the holding area? :P Thanks! Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 19:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done [3] – Since we started our new processes I've been doing stuff like this manually, but I must have missed it (and a couple of others), sorry.

@Theopolisme: Now that we've been going for several weeks, I don't think this post [4] is as relevant. Would you be able to look at doing some more bot coding for TAFI? - Evad37 [talk] 01:31, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey; sure! Do you just want the noms -> holding area bot turned back on? Theopolisme (talk) 02:17, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The code will need to be modified, as it needs to take the nom, extract the article title, and add # [[Article title]] to the list in Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Holding area/new. Other things that would be good to automate would be the removal of {{TAFI}} and adding {{Former TAFI}} for the previous week's article (did I screw that up by changing the schedule page around?), and randomly selecting 10 articles from the holding area to be moved here for voting each week. - Evad37 [talk] 02:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone want to volunteer to write creative blurbs for scheduled TAFI articles that the WMF Social Media Team can post? A past example for twitter and facebook/google plus is:

• t: A barren Wikipedia article is a farce. Help us edit today's article for improvement, "Farce" #TAFI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farce
• f/g: The English Wikipedia article on "Farce" is pretty true to its name and in need of improvement. We’d love for you to contribute to Today’s Article for Improvement, #TAFI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farce

It would be great if someone would write these on a weekly basis, after each article has been scheduled, and leave them at meta:Social media/Calendar. - Evad37 [talk] 02:23, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like you're looking for puns... I hope you're looking for bad puns:

• Today's article for improvement is "Impossible object". Help turn this confusing read around!
• Unlike "Spy satellites", we don't track your movements. Please log in and edit today's article for improvement!

And next week looks like it'll be human skeleton, anubis or Oscar speech:

• We have the bones of a great article. Please help flesh out today's article for improvement, "Human skeleton".
• How does today's article for improvement weigh up against truth? Let's make "Anubis" a divine read!
• Today's article for improvement is "Oscar speech", help us write something to be thankful for.

Well, I'm sure someone else can do better! Tomásdearg92 (talk) 13:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• *sigh* ...as the person in charge of this task back in the day, I guess I must give my input as well. What we were essentially looking for were witticisms that made people really intrigued about an article, and want to find out more / get engaged with the topic. Humor, mystery, and cultural references greatly helped. One of my favourites was the one I wrote for something language-related that had had behind the scenes controversies in the past (forgot what exactly): "___ is today's TAFI. Add homonyms, but not ad hominems". :D--Coin945 (talk) 13:43, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Impossible to object the state of Impossible object. Help turn today's #TAFI into something worth looking at.
• I Spy an article that needs to go from lite to e[l]lite with the use of your internet. So don't just 'sat' there, help today's #TAFI Spy satellite!

Sounds like more than one person can have fun with this kind of stuff. We should make a work area (talk page or project page) with lists of blurbs, and then just post them to the media area as the week goes on. Looks like they take requests up to about 7 days in advance. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 01:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where should the Number of daily hits parameter for {{TAFI nom}} come from? There appear to be some anomalous readings in recent nominations by Coin945 e.g. [5], [6], [7], [8]... ~KvnG 16:50, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops my bad. I copied the figures over from that page, not realising they were the total views, not the daily ones.--Coin945 (talk) 02:45, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Placed after the "TAFI nominations" "Holding area" tab, methinks. Is there also a way to reduce the number of tabs? it just seems overcrowded.. That way we can add a second one for the social media aspect we've been taking about above. Or at least we can develop a way to incorporate that discussion into the way the Voting tab works.--Coin945 (talk) 03:14, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

+1 on a separate space for voting, good idea. Maybe we should have an "infobox"-style navigation instead of tabs, ie something like the following box - 04:13, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

TAFI
Project home (WP:TAFI) Talk page (WT:TAFI) Members (WP:TAFI/M) Nominations (WP:TAFINOM) Holding area (WP:TAFIHA) Voting area (WP:TAFI/V) Schedule (WP:TAFI/S) Social media blurbs (WP:TAFI/SM) Accomplishments (WP:TAFI/A) Archives (WP:TAFI/AR)

+1 good idea -Newyorkadam (talk) 04:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam[reply]

The box looks good, excellent work, however I think we should leave the voting on the project talk page. I believe we will get more random participants in this manner. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 16:48, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Or you can just have a box on the talk page saying "its time for a new vote" with a link tot he voting page. Everyone is pinged in the relevant page anyways. I never vote because i realise its the right time. I get pinged then click on the link that ops up in my notifications.. without even reading what it is.--Coin945 (talk) 17:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at the Holding Area article list, and I noticed that the articles Industry, Dessert, and Monty Python's Flying Circus are all on the list twice. Is this intentional? Should we remove these articles? --Horai 551 10:49, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed Monty Python's Flying Circus got in there a second time because it was successfully nominated a second time, while still in the holding area from the first time it was nom'ed. Not quite sure what happened with the other two, but thanks for pointing it out. - 13:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)