This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aymatth2 (talk | contribs) at 14:34, 9 April 2023 (→Project-independent quality assessments: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 14:34, 9 April 2023 by Aymatth2 (talk | contribs) (→Project-independent quality assessments: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Australian television and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 12 months  |
 | Australia: Television Project‑class | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Request for Assessment
I was wondering if anyone would assess the article First Day (TV series)? I am hoping for a C-class or B-class listing. Thanks. SatDis (talk) 03:23, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- I am still hoping for a B-class assessment if anyone is able to. Thanks. SatDis (talk) 05:13, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Freeview entry on Wikidata
I had proposed a property on Wikidata to see if a entry suits onto there and once the property is being created, it is possible to link those available programme onto the Free view website. Shinjiman ⇔ ♨ 01:42, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
OzTAM Ratings data via TV Tonight
I noticed that David Knox of TV Tonight wrote a post that said he had to delete 11 years worth of ratings reports from the site, and that OzTAM is also addressing Misplaced Pages for compliance similarly. Does this mean that we will have to remove citations for the removed data? I understand that the daily ratings wrap articles are not affected by this change, but I'm concerned that a number of articles under the project are going to have to go under major reference changes due to using the now-unavailable data. Reader781 (talk) 21:22, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Wow, this is big news. Also interested to see what others think. SatDis (talk) 21:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
User script to detect unreliable sources
Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliableI have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Misplaced Pages. The idea is that it takes something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (
John Smith "" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Move discussion at The Cheap Seats (Australian TV series)
An editor has requested for The Cheap Seats (Australian TV series) to be moved to The Cheap Seats. Since you had some involvement with The Cheap Seats (Australian TV series), you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so). Happily888 (talk) 01:24, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments are used by Misplaced Pages editors to rate the quality of articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Misplaced Pages:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project decides to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:34, 9 April 2023 (UTC)