Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:49, 23 February 2007

Welcome to the talk page of Emiellaiendiay. You can view old comments by going to Archive 1.

Archives

Archive 1 User: Emiellaiendiay

JAC

Hehe, same grade. I'll have to challenge you again sometime... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. — Emiellaiendiay 19:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

RE: WP Africa Invitation

Thanks for the invitation Emiellaiendiay. -- FayssalF - 09:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome and thanks for all you are doing on Misplaced Pages

I see nobody has officially welcomed you; so that would be me. Your level of energy and creativity is herewith acknowledged. It is refreshing to see someone put so much positive effort forward, since Misplaced Pages is rife with people who complain and criticise, without producing much in the way of real additions. I have a few queries regarding your newly created and excellent idea for "Jumpaclass"

• I don't see how you are doing the accounting, for example, if one creates a new article and takes it to "start class". Does that create twice the point count as just moving a "stub" to "start"?
• What does "head to head" mean?
• Is it allowed to help out on another article that has been listed by another editor?"

(please respond here to keep the thread intact, as i am watching this page for now.) Anlace 23:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome and acknowledgement. Before I say anything else, I must rightly acknowledge Dev920 for the invention of Jumpaclass. I've only tried to get the concept started on other WikiProjects. (It orginated on WP:LGBT, as can be viewed here.) It's been quite effective in that project, so I thought it could be brought over to WP:BAY.

I'll now address your questions:

• Besides wondering about how it would work, I haven't really considered the creation of a new article. As of now the project only considers taking a stub, start, or B-class article to a higher class. If it is to include creating articles from scratch, I'd add on an extra point for taking an article from nonexistence to stub status. So instead of two, it'd be three points.

• Head-to-head is when an editor challenges another editor to compete in Jumpaclass. They each pick an article on the same day. Each attempts to bring his or her article to a higher class than the other, within a week. The final class of the article is judged a different editor than either of the two participating in head-to-head.

• I suppose it is impossible to avoid having other editors work on an article at the same time, but the contributions of only the editor participating in Jumpaclass should be considered in terms of getting points. This does bring up an interesting idea: joint collaboration, which I think I might add as an option.

Check out the LGBT Jumpaclass to see how Jumpaclass works when more it's active than SFBA's currently is.

You've brought up a lot of good points, so I'll make some changes to Jumpaclass right now.

— Emiellaiendiay 23:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Thanks for participating in it!

Thanks for your quick clarifications. The LGBT Jumpaclass does look good, being so active. Hopefully we can stimulate a similar level of fervour. One more question/suggestion. We should make sure we have a mechanism for early review if an editor requests to allow for a shot at DYK, since DYK has only a five day window for acceptance. The stub tag needs to be removed for proper nomination to DYK. As above please respond here. Anlace 01:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Apologies, but I'm not very familiar with DYK. Would you please explain how it works, so that I better understand your question? Also, are you referring to the project tag with the stub class listed, or to the stub tags placed on the article page? Thanks, — Emiellaiendiay 01:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

DYK stands for "Did you know?". These are articles selected by administrators to appear in summary form on the main page of wikipedia. To qualify an article must be either new or newly evolved from stub to higher class. The key timing element is that it is not eligible for DYK if it is over 5 days old. Thus if we wait a full 7 days to review the newly graduated articles, they wouldnt make the deadline. It would be nice to have all the hard work of the SF bay area group be acknowledged on the main page. i see the possible solutions as follows:

• 1. An editor could request early review by placing a tag beside her (or his) nom such as "(Review now)"
• 2. An editor could request early review by placing a tag saying "(needs early review for DYK)". In this case the article should be scheduled for a more thorough review at your seven day mark, in case the article improves further. And at least the stub tag could be removed at the early point to allow DYK candidacy. Anlace 03:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I've added the option of "speedy review" to the list. Do you think that takes care of the issue? — Emiellaiendiay 03:49, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Jumpaclass

Thanks for the invitation! I'm afraid though that I'm more of a nuts-and-bolts person making small changes to articles. If you look here: Misplaced Pages:WikiGnome you will find a picture of me. :-) Schmiteye 01:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

All right; that's fine. But if you ever feel like contributing to an article beyond Gnome-edits, you know where Jumpaclass is! P.S. Thanks for teaching me a new Wiki-term. — Emiellaiendiay 01:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)