Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Coordinators

Coordinator tasks on election pages

I'm just setting up the December election page. While reviewing, the list of coordinator duties seems somewhat outdated. The current list is:

Here are some examples of coordinator duties:

• manage the proposal and creation of new task forces;
• ensure project announcements and task lists are kept up-to-date;
• initiate drafting of guidelines needed by the project;
• organize the category system;
• oversee the recruitment of new members, including the use of project notices and other advertising methods;
• create and maintain any collaborative projects;
• maintain the project pages and the guidelines on them in a clean and easy-to-use state;
• monitor technical policies and ensure project templates satisfy them; and
• assist in organizing and promoting any Backlog Elimination Drives and Blitzes.

The lines I've identified in bold seem out of date and not relevant to the ways we work these days. I wonder if they should be rewritten in a more meaningful way, perhaps based on the task list, to reflect what we actually do here. Any thorts? Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for both, Baffle. I think "initiate drafting of guidelines needed by the project" and "monitor technical policies and ensure project templates satisfy them" can be rewritten as "draft guidelines needed by the project" and "monitor technical policies and ensure that project templates are in compliance", respectively; the other bolded duties can be deleted. With few workers in a large vineyard, we need to work smart. All the best, Miniapolis 13:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

My quick opinion as a multi-year coordinator (now emeritus) is that all of the bold ones could be deleted. I'm happy with rewrites of one or two if others want to keep them. I would also increase emphasis on the drives and blitzes, and on tracking backlog progress and monitoring the requests page, since that has been the main coordinator work for the last few years, AFAICT. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:31, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both, I'll copy the list into my user space and draft a rejigged version. Pinging the other coordinators @Wracking and Mox Eden:, do you have anything to add here? It's now drafted at my user space. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 19:01, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

The list could do with better definitions and more specificity. What task forces did we ever have? I can only imagine, having joined in 2014, that at the creation of the guild/league/whatever there were groups of people who, say, set up the templates and scripts that we now take for granted. Should we have reserve powers in that regard, in case we need new task forces? How did we ever "organize" the category system? I monitor the backlog categories and work to remove articles that creep in when, say, a tag is converted to a copy-edit one, without changing the date, but I don't really organize the categories. "Create" collaborative projects? We might represent the guild in collaborative discussions with other wikiprojects, but we don't create such collaborations on our own. We could do with a centralized list of things to monitor and maintain (e.g. the database dump, in collaboration with the typo team, or the redirects from other templates that we have taken on recently). Et cetera. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC) (edited 21:25, 19 October 2024 (UTC))

The above list doesn't include newsletters or other reports as far as I can tell. Shouldn't it? BlueMoonset (talk) 00:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Our current instructions, at the drive and blitz pages, suggest that a newsletter be sent out at the end of every such event, when in fact we now only send them out on a quarterly basis. So, yes, we should move such instructions from those event pages to a more centralized place. Dhtwiki (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I have just removed the "Create a newsletter" instructions from the drive and blitz pages. An adaptation could be placed with the general coordinator instructions, such as:

• Create a quarterly newsletter with highlights of previous events, as well as announcements of upcoming ones, and have it sent out by someone with permission to use Special:MassMessage. See this sample quarterly newsletter.

Dhtwiki (talk) 23:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I checked the records; this is old material; it originates at the first GOCE election in December 2010, long before I joined. It was later split into its current list format. It's obvious the GOCE has changed a lot since 2010, though I wouldn't mind the level of participation back then! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 00:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Just under 500 guild members back then, and the election of coordinators seems more like a Request for Adminship. Now we have over 750 and the coordinators seem to just elect each other without much, if any, support from the non-coordinator side. Voter turnout has plummeted. That election seems close to, but not quite at, the big bang moment of creation, as the lead coordinator writes of having found the guild in a disorganized state and given it some form. Dhtwiki (talk) 08:18, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

IIRC, that was the transition period between the League of Copy Editors and its revival as the GOCE. I wish more editors were interested in maintaining the guild, which is better for improving the encyclopedia than drive-by copyediting. All the best, Miniapolis 13:26, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

(←) I agree with Baffle; there was a lot more enthusiasm (maybe a bit too much) back in the day. Think I joined the guild around January 2011, and nowadays only a couple of folks are doing the heavy lifting so we need to work smart – not hard. BlueMoonset, would you like to help out as a coordinator? All the best, Miniapolis 13:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Miniapolis, unfortunately, January through June 2025 will be crunch time for me on a major project, with no time for other responsibilities. I could probably serve July through December 2025 as a coordinator, if there's need. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:01, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, BlueMoonset; there's always a need. Don't work too hard and all the best, Miniapolis 20:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft 1

Thanks for your responses; I've cobbled together a draft of the section; the bolded lines represent replacement examples (except for verb-tense changes). Feel free to edit; I've left a copy of this at my sandbox if it's needed.

Here are some examples of coordinator duties:

• monitoring the project's Main, Coordinators and Requests talk pages, and responding to questions and comments there
• ensuring project announcements and task lists are kept up-to-date
• drafting of guidelines needed by the project
• monitoring and maintaining the Requests page and the category Wikipedia articles needing copy edit
• overseeing the recruitment of new members, including the use of project notices and other advertising methods
• creating, finalizing and distributing regular newsletters, annual reports and other project announcements
• maintaining the project pages and the guidelines on them in a clean and easy-to-use state
• updating statistics on outward-facing project pages and
• assisting with organizing and promoting any Backlog Elimination Drives, Blitzes and twice-annual coordinator elections.

Cheers, Baffle☿gab 02:54, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I suggest having "assisting with organizing and promoting any Backlog Elimination..." moved up, possibly to first place, and made both more general and more specific:

• assisting with organizing and promoting any editathons:
  • month-long Backlog Elimination Drives held during odd-numbered months
  • week-long Blitzes held in even-numbered months during Sunday–Saturday mid-month weeks to be determined nearer the time

We should add the drive and blitz talk pages to

• monitoring the project's Main, Coordinators and Requests talk pages, and responding to questions and comments there;

as that is where many questions arise.

There is vagueness and overlap among:

• ensuring project announcements and task lists are kept up-to-date;
• drafting of guidelines needed by the project;
• overseeing the recruitment of new members, including the use of project notices and other advertising methods;
• maintaining the project pages and the guidelines on them in a clean and easy-to-use state;

We could have more specificity, such as mentioning that the newsletters are quarterly and what project announcements are meant, here:

• creating, finalizing and distributing regular newsletters, annual reports and other project announcements;

or what is to be looked for, such as requesters exceeding their limit or not being of sufficient standing, or of ancient articles creeping into the backlog, here:

• monitoring and maintaining the Requests page and the category Wikipedia articles needing copy edit;

Be more specific about what constitutes:

• updating statistics on outward-facing project pages;

and have this line be closer to what generates the statistics, such as the drives and blitzes.

Dhtwiki (talk) 04:57, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Dhtwiki; that's a lot of thorts and I will look through these suggestions later today when i have more wiki-time. :) Cheers, Baffle☿gab 09:33, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I've now reviewed the above and have drafted a new version below. I've bolded my changes from the first draft. I think we should keep this list fairly short and concise, we could direct those looking for more details to the task list. I also removed the semicolons except one, which looks cleaner but odd to me. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 08:49, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft 2

Here are some examples of coordinator duties:

• assisting with the organizing and promotion of regular editathons:
  • month-long Backlog Elimination Drives held during odd-numbered months
  • week-long Blitzes held Sunday-to-Saturday in even-numbered months, on mid-month weeks to be decided in advance
• updating statistics on the main project page
• monitoring the project's main talk pages (Main, Requests and Coordinators), and talk pages of any ongoing editathons, and responding to questions and comments there
• ensuring project announcements in the ombox and task lists are kept up-to-date
• drafting of guidelines needed by the project
• monitoring and maintaining the Requests page and the category Wikipedia articles needing copy edit
• overseeing the recruitment of new members, including the use of project notices and other advertising methods
• creating, finalizing and distributing quarterly newsletters and annual reports
• maintaining the project pages and the guidelines on them in a clean and easy-to-use state; and
• creating, promoting, opening, updating and closing twice-annual coordinator elections.

Cheers, Baffle☿gab 08:49, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

...organizing, promotion, and monitoring of regular editathons:

make clear that the daily updating the "Progress Chart" of relative drives and blitzes is one of the more, if not the most of, urgent tasks (at least for those who have given themselves the duty).

week-long Blitzes...on a mid-month week...

so as not to imply that a blitz lasts longer than one week, although that might have been made clear upfront.

updating statistics on...main project page

we might list the statistics page that is transcluded onto that page: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Progress

monitoring the project's main talk pages...

not really urgent business and could be lower down.

ensuring project announcements...

this has mainly to do with drives and blitzes being announced; "task lists" is vague and refers to what?

drafting of guidelines needed by the project

this is vague, non-urgent, and should be lower down.

monitoring and maintaining...requests and backlog

this is vague; what it entails on the requests page involves policing editors' exceeding request limits, determing articles in too much flux, answering questions re the scope of copy editing, etc., and thus could be more specific; with regard to the backlog involves fixing articles that have been dated to months long since covered, as well as the typo team database report, which could use an item all to itself.

overseeing the recruitment of new members...

we have the members; we need more participation in drives in blitzes.

creating, finalizing and distributing quarterly newsletters and annual reports

we might say that, more-or-less, March, June, September, and December are presently the newsletter months and that January is what we try for when issuing the annual report, with links to sample versions of each.

maintaining the project pages and the guidelines on them...

vague; we could be more specific about exactly what pages are meant.

...twice-annual coordinator elections

this is fairly urgent and probably should not be last.

Dhtwiki (talk) 05:32, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback, Dhtwiki. I thought this list was intended to be a brief summary of duties, so some vagueness is to be expected. We can (and should, IMO) refer prospective candidates to the full tasks list. I think we need to strike a balance between granularity, and ease of reading and navigating the page. I'll put some time into a new redraft, probably later today. It is getting there, I think. :) Cheers, Baffle☿gab 06:05, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

I had forgotten about the "Task list" page. Why don't we refer people to that page with just a few of the most important tasks (setting up, maintaining, and answering questions regarding the drive and blitz pages) being mentioned on the elections page, where trying to summarize all the tasks in a vague way seems somewhat fruitless to me? Dhtwiki (talk) 22:59, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks; yes I think we should do that. I'm going to draft another copy below. It can probably be refined and simplified as needed. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 09:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft 3

Here are some examples of coordinator duties:

• assisting with the organizing and promotion of regular editathons:
  • month-long Backlog Elimination Drives held in odd-numbered months
  • week-long Blitzes held Sunday-to-Saturday on a mid-month week in even-numbered months to be decided in advance
• updating statistics on the progress chart
• monitoring the project's main talk pages (Main, Requests and Coordinators), and talk pages of any ongoing editathons, and responding to questions and comments there
• creating, promoting and holding twice-yearly coordinator elections.
• ensuring project announcements in the ombox and task lists are kept up-to-date
• drafting of guidelines needed by the project
• monitoring and maintaining the Requests page and the category Wikipedia articles needing copy edit
• encouraging the participation of new and extant members, including the use of project notices and other advertising methods
• creating, finalizing and distributing quarterly newsletters and annual reports; and
• maintaining the project pages and the guidelines on them in a clean and easy-to-use state.

Here is a full list of tasks for GOCE coordinators. Feel free to ask questions at the Coordinators talk page.

Cheers, Baffle☿gab 09:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

(←) Since comments on this draft have not been forthcoming, I've copied the above with some minor tweaks, to the election page here (diff). Feel free to edit, adjust or revert if necessary. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 22:59, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I have thoughts, and I was going to comment at some point.

• The list is not well ordered. For example, an urgent task, monitoring the requests page is toward the back and could be combined with "monitoring the project's main talk pages...", which itself could stand to be placed first, as the most urgent, possibly daily duty (if we didn't have a non-coordinator doing so much of the requests work, it would definitely seem a more urgent task if that page were not to fall into disrepair). In general, the tasks should be ordered from most to least urgent, with those tasks that are merely possibilities or are nebulously described (e.g. "drafting of guidelines needed by the project") being held until last.
• The monitoring and handling of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Database Report, which is a monthly event that can involve dozens of articles, isn't even mentioned, either here or at the full list.

Dhtwiki (talk) 03:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC) (edited 04:01, 20 November 2024 and 04:21, 20 November 2024 (UTC) (UTC))

Hi @Dhtwiki:, thanks for your response; I'll re-order the list at the election page. I think any time-sensitive or neglected task can be classed as urgent until it's done, and once it's done it's lost its urgency for a while! Please feel free to edit the election page as you see fit, I don't own it. I'll also add the database report to the full tasks list, though it's not an area I'm involved with. I don't think this list on election pages was ever intended to be a comprehensive or definitive, btw. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 20:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

I've reordered the list as suggested here (permalink), and added the database report here (diff). Cheers, Baffle☿gab 19:56, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Dhtwiki (talk) 22:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

December 2024 blitz

Baffle has started the blitz page. I suggest the week of the 15th to the 21st. The previous week (8–14) is rushing it, especially with the newsletter to go out before the blitz; and the following week (22–28) is Christmas week. The theme, as usual, can be the oldest backlog months–July 2023 (29 articles) and August 2023 (89 articles)—and the oldest months on the requests page—October 2024 (17 articles, with 2 being worked on) and November 2024 (20 articles, with 2 completed and 1 partially done). Dhtwiki (talk) 09:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC) (edited 22:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC))

Sounds good, and thanks both. All the best, Miniapolis 14:30, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Barnstars

The barnstar table is complete, ready for checking, and for barnstars to be distributed. Dhtwiki (talk) 22:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Done, and thanks. Happy holidays and all the best, Miniapolis 19:38, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

January 2025 drive

Baffle has started the January 2025 drive page. The backlog shows July 2023 with 16 articles, August 2023 with 69, and September 2023 with 93. What should be the range here?

We are doing very well on the requests page. There are only 6 left from November 2024, with three already being worked on, and 23 from December 2024. Should those two months be our range? Dhtwiki (talk) 11:13, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Ssssshhh, don't jinx it... I'm hoping November will be gone by the time the drive starts. :) Cheers, Baffle☿gab 14:21, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm with Baffle :-). Howzabout the July and August 2023 backlog? We can always add September if needed. Happy holidays and all the best, Miniapolis 14:27, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

I have done some more setting up, linking to, advertising, etc., with July–August 2023 being the bonus backlog months. I have usually held off asking for a watchlist message to be placed, but it took somewhat longer than I expected to have the request for the November message acted on (the drive was well underway, as I recall). Does anyone have any idea as to what the "sweet spot" might be for such a message (e.g. well before the drive starts, although we have other notifications at such a time; or after the drive starts, when it may be more useful as a belated reminder)? Dhtwiki (talk) 09:25, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

I used to request a watchlist notice a day or so before the drive started, to be listed for a fortnight, or less if something else was going up there. For getting sign-ups, I think we can be flexible with the timing. A later notice might allow us to gauge its effectiveness. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 11:43, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Near the start of this year's July or September drive, IIRC, I requested the message last from the 1st to the 14th, per some instructions I encountered that allowed for such a message to last for so long. Someone replied that 7 days was the norm, and that is how long the recent messages have lasted. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:45, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

(←) I'm in the process of compiling the barnstar page, but Khane Rokhl Barazani's entries are nonexistent; I've pinged them, and will wait a day or two for a correction to post the table. All the best, Miniapolis 17:00, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

The barnstars and what-not are ready for distribution; Khane Rokhl Barazani didn't want to fix anything. All the best, Miniapolis 00:12, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

I saw the error in KRB's entry, which they did try to correct but not effectively. I will make necessary adjustments to the barnstar table before passing them out. Dhtwiki (talk) 07:43, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, Dhtwiki; I'll do yours. All the best, Miniapolis 20:37, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Election results; graphs on drive pages

It may be time for Dhtwiki to post the election results :-). I think we should delete the graph stuff from the drive pages; according to this, the Chart extension will be a new template when it's deployed on enWP (hopefully in the near future) and we won't be using {{Graph:Chart}} any more. It'll be similar, but we'll need to reconfigure anyway. All the best, Miniapolis 20:31, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Miniapolis; I hope the new template will be code-compatible so the experts can fix things using a bot, or maybe a redirect. September seems to be their target. I really don't fancy going through a decade or so of our old drive / blitz pages, annual reports, etc. :-| But I can remove it in our page templates, as I've done in the 2024 annual report. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 21:48, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

If I were to close the election on my own, I would, as I indicated in a comment I made on the election page, be tempted to include our new applicants, for their spunk, our lack of indicating that experience was necessary when encouraging such participation, and in spite of leaving them little to do or possibly getting things wrong if they are rather more bold. But that might not be the consensus. What say the rest of you?

Regarding the graphs, I found nothing at the link above. This is a relevant page and seems to be what was meant. I have continued to update the graphical data points at the drive and blitz pages, and I assume that should continue. As Baffle suggests, some syntactic transmogrification, by bot or ad hoc regular expression, should be all that is necessary to conform to the new implementation. Dhtwiki (talk) 01:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC) (edited 04:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC))

Sorry about that, Dhtwiki; I conflated meta and MediaWiki, and corrected my link. I also think we should bring the new applicants on board; you never know who will stick around. Oh no, Baffle, I didn't mean to go through the old stuff; AFAICT, though, we'll have to configure the new extension when it's deployed here so I don't see the point of maintaining an extension which won't be used again. All the best, Miniapolis 03:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Relying to Dhtwiki: Many are called but few are chosen. After checking their editing histories, my opinion is one nom was a drive-by from an editor with at-that-time fewer than 500 edits. The other, with 109 edits (and still has), may have been hat collecting (see here (diff 1) and here (diff 2)) in their short tenure. The first candidate also showed poor use of English in their nom, and gave poor responses to my simple questions. And the second promised a copy-editing event every month (we already do that) and a "massive recruitment program". I don't think either of these editors, as yet, have the skill, knowledge or tact to effectively coordinate; and I think absent coordinators also have a negative effect. The new editor I likely would have supported, who's name I had seen at drives and blitzes, withdrew their nom. Maybe the next election page could say something like "Successful nominees will show some skill at Wikipedia editing and some knowledge of GOCE processes". Baffle☿gab 03:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Many are called but few came forward, and beggars can't be choosers. I can only disagree with one of Baffle's points: we have had nearly absent coordinators before, who didn't last, and that has not hurt us. An absent coordinator is better than a disruptive one, who would try to accomplish things beyond their ken. Having more names signifies interest and I think that helps regardless. Dhtwiki (talk) 06:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Both your views have merit. I think we should take on the noobs because we didn't restrict candidacy, and add Baffle's caveat to future election pages. All the best, Miniapolis 14:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

(←) Pinging @Mox Eden and Jonesey95: for their opinions. Baffle☿gab 19:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't have any opinion on the coordinator elections; as long as coords do no harm, I think they are (perhaps tautologically, but nevertheless) harmless. I'm happy to help out with coord tasks if we get short-handed sometimes, but I don't want to commit to a full six months. As for a graphs, I think that we should soldier on and keep updating the data in the hope that a nice migration will be forthcoming. If we don't see anything by the end of 2025, we can reevaluate. Are these the two things you wanted my feedback on? – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I have added both new coordinators' names to relevant lists (but not in alphabetical order, as would be usual), but I may have been precipitate. Although enough time has elapsed, I should not move without real consensus, and I do not want the welcoming impulse of some to dampen the enthusiasm of others. Any further thoughts? Any second thoughts? Dhtwiki (talk) 00:49, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

The two new editors may not be following along so it might be wise to inform them of their new roles. Regards, Baffle☿gab 06:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

New template, etc.

I've taken the liberty of creating {{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors Annual Reports}} and adding it to our old annual reports, giving readers a quick and easy way to surf the reports. I'm sure they'll be fascinated. I've also added those reports to Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors, and I may eventually make a subcat for them. The 2024 report is already in the template but hidden. I may also look at replacing some of the outdated HTML tags like <center>...</center> I noticed with CSS if I get bored enough. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 19:01, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

Some will be fascinated. Such colorful graphs for the first two years (how did they survive?), and an encomium from Jimbo. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC) (edited 09:40, 17 January 2025 (UTC))

Tidying and updating GOCE categories

I'm currently on a mission to tidy the messy categories within Category: WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. Historically, these have been set up in a piecemeal and sometimes-inconsistent way. I've already rearranged our newsletters into year-based subcats within Category: WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors newsletters (discussed here with Miniapolis (permalink) and annual reports within Category: WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors annual reports. Among my thinking is to:

• ensure all of the Guild's pages are at least within the main category;
• move all old drive and blitz pages into their own year-based sub-cats of Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors backlog elimination drives and Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors blitzes – these can be called "WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors backlog elimination drives / blitzes from 20xx";
  • Drive / blitz barnstar pages can have their own sub-cat; these can be useful when checking stats for newsletters and annual reports.
• move other sets of Guild pages (templates etc) into their own sub-cats as needed.

I know getting 14+ years of pages sorted out is a big job, but it's doable and we can chip away at as we go. Is my approach suitable or would there be a better approach to organizing our legacy? Does anything else need (re)organizing? Cheers, Baffle☿gab 20:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, Baffle. All the best, Miniapolis 23:23, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Tasks

I'm listing the category-tidying tasks here, I'll strike them as I go. This is mostly a self-reminder because I'm likely to forget what I'm doing, but i won't complain if anyone else wants to get stuck in. If there are any category moves, fixes or tasks I should consider, please add them below. Also, please correct me if I'm doing stuff I shouldn't be.

• Add all request archive pages to Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors requests archives  Done
• Add all request talk archive pages to Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors requests talk archives  Done
• Add all main-talk archive pages to Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors talk archives  Done
• Add all coordinators-talk archive pages to Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors coordinators talk archives  Done
• Add all old drive pages to Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors drive pages from 20xx (year)  Done
• Add all old blitz pages to Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors blitz pages from 20xx (year)  Done
  • Add all old blitz barnstar pages to Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors blitz barnstar pages from 20xx (year) Done
• Add all uncategorised pages in Guildspace at least to Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors  Working intermittently. 06:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
• Any other category-based or page-sorting tasks that come up.
  • Side-quest when ICBA: Check old sign-up sections; remove signup code, and check for and re-add links back to the previous drive / blitz. (some blitzes done)

I stress again this list is mostly for my benefit. That lot should keep me busy for a while, anyway. I also need a bit of accountability so please poke me on my talk page if I do nothing or stop half-way! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 08:16, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Discussions

Thank you for doing this housekeeping. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:55, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Please remember to create categories before you add pages to those categories. There are some gnomes who get really bothered by red-linked categories, and they will show up here to express their grumpiness. We don't need that kind of noise. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:11, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I will remember to create them, but I'm working manually. I redlink categories first, follow the last redlinks and then create the cat pages. This doesn't usually take more than ten minutes per year so the grumpy gnomes can chill out. :) I expect some may be miffed by the empty categories if I work the other way. There are some older sub-pages I intend to return to re-cat eventually. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 07:25, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, you can't win with those gnomes. Keep going! – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:16, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

I notice that some pages needed a category template changed and others needed an entirely new one added. Why the difference? Do we need better template code or coordinator instructions going forward? Dhtwiki (talk) 08:12, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

This is due to inconsistent practices in the past; the barnstar pages were not categorised so I wanted to bring them into the drives category under the appropriate drive / blitz. Neither were some of the older newsletters and a few other odd pages. An eariier attempt to categorise the newsletters was reverted because of transclusions to users' talk pages in the early years of the project. Our page systems are now much more consistent so I don't think we need to adjust coordinator instructions, which can lead to instruction creep; though it may be worth seeing if the drive and blitz page-creation templates can be modded to append "from {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}" to the category. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 16:13, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

February 2025 blitz

I have started the blitz page, for the week of the 16th to the 22nd, concentrating on the August (21 articles) and September (82 articles) 2023 backlog and all requests (28 articles from January 2024, and 6, so far, from February, with 3 December 2024 articles being worked on and likely completed before the blitz). Dhtwiki (talk) 14:12, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Barnstars

The barnstar table is ready. Dhtwiki (talk) 12:42, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Annual Report is almost ready

The 2024 requests are all done and archived. I've checked the top-five copy-editors and requesters, there are no changes. I'm happy the Annual Report is ready for its final checks before sending. if anyone sees anything obviously wrong, please fix it if you can. The topsheet is here. I'm happy to give out the top-five barnstars and I invoke my usual BS opt-out. I can send it next week if everyone's happy. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC) Update: --> Actually, scrub that, I've done my bit and I'm handing it off to the lede coordinator; they can do whatever they wish. Baffle☿gab 19:55, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I have made a couple of corrections but haven't yet checked things thoroughly (I trust things have been well done when I wasn't the one doing them). I was not aware of barnstars being given out on the basis of top-five performance on the annual report (if we are talking of copy editing, those people may already have been well compensated with the usual barnstars; although more might be welcome by some). Dhtwiki (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:29, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I seemed to remember barnstars being given out to top-five copy-editors and requesters in previous years but I've struck that comment as I may be mistaken. Sorry. I feel like I've done my bit there now and I'm handing it off. Let me know if you'd prefer to send it yourself. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 00:18, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

I can send out the topsheet. Dhtwiki (talk) 12:44, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I think the annual report is ready to go. After waiting for the coords to do all of the heavy lifting, I gave it a minor polish. Thanks to the coords for doing such a thorough job with this annual report! – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:14, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

The report top sheet has been sent, 0636 UTC, with a non-personalized timestamp ("Sent by ~~~~"). Dhtwiki (talk) 06:56, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

March 2025 drive

I have started the drive page (March starts on Saturday). August through October 2023 (17, 71, 126 articles respectively) is what I have down for the backlog. We might have enough to do with just the first two months. The requests total 16 from January, with 3 being worked on; and 17 from February, not counting 1 marked as already done. Dhtwiki (talk) 13:34, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Sounds good. Thanks for doing the blitz barnstar page, and I've distributed them. All the best, Miniapolis 18:32, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Barnstars

@Miniapolis: I have gone ahead and calculated the drive barnstars. So, there is no need to run the script, except as a check. I will distribute the awards later. Dhtwiki (talk) 16:40, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

All but my barnstars have been handed out or accounted for. Dhtwiki (talk) 08:08, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Done. Thanks and all the best, Miniapolis 20:38, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

April 2025 newsletter

I have started a newsletter for April, to be sent out once the April blitz is determined, if anyone wants to check it or add to it. Dhtwiki (talk) 09:35, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

The newsletter should be in its final form. I would like a final check before I send it, preferably before the blitz starts tomorrow. Dhtwiki (talk) 09:55, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Looks great, and thanks. All the best, Miniapolis 13:51, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Correction required

After my sending the newsletter, a mass correction was required, according to this "MassMessage fix request" thread. I am not quite sure what needs to be done in future, but will investigate. Dhtwiki (talk) 06:24, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

I compared the December and April newsletters in edit mode. The <div> should be closed (</div>), but apparently the big thing is the noinclude category stuff (which needs to be removed before sending). Who knew? :-) Pinging Jonesey95, who knows more about this stuff than I. All the best, Miniapolis 20:50, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

I tried to play with some of the features at mw:Help:Extension:MassMessage, including sending just a section of a page, but every way of getting the right result is less good than:

• Compose the newsletter, omitting the category.
• Check the "Page information" page for Linter errors, and fix any that are present.
• Send the newsletter.
• Add the category.

That's the best that I could come up with that was still easy. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:08, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, both, for the followups. I will take this advice to heart. I will also try to better organize the 2025 categories, with, say, the barnstar pages as subcategories of the respective drive and blitz pages. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:24, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

April 2025 blitz

I have created the April blitz page, to run from the 12th to the 19th. I have included September (21 articles) and October (59) 2023 as the backlog months. All requests number 28 with 2 being worked on. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:51, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Barnstars

The April barnstars have been calculated and should be ready to hand out. Dhtwiki (talk) 00:11, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Done, and thanks. All the best, Miniapolis 13:31, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

May 2025 drive

May begins a week from Thursday. I have started the May drive page. The backlog months are September (12 articles), October (48), and November (73) 2023. The requests page contains 28 articles with 1 being worked on (Feb 4 (1), March (8), and April (16), with none yet for May 2025). Dhtwiki (talk) 06:46, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Barnstars

I have calculated the barnstar table. Feel free to check it. I will probably hand out the awards later today. Dhtwiki (talk) 10:32, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

I have now distributed all barnstars except my own. Dhtwiki (talk) 05:13, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Done. Thanks and all the best, Miniapolis 19:02, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Nice work, all. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:28, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Coordinator elections

I'm a little confused about coordinator elections. How do they work? Are all nominees with at least 1 approval vote accepted? If so, isn't this really supect to sock/meatpuppets? What if there are a lot (like 100) nominees? Thank you, GoldRomean (talk) 23:15, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for asking; please see WP:GOCE/COORD. We expect coordinators to help as they can with the drives and blitzes, although I haven't seen much of a couple of our current coordinators. It's not a glamor job and not a lot of work, but the project doesn't run itself :-). All the best, Miniapolis 00:21, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

We have never, in my experience, had a problem with too many applications. If we ever do, we will have to become more selective. At our last election (12/24), we allowed in two new coordinators who had little-to-no-experience and who each had one support vote. There was some disagreement about that, and I, too, haven't seen much of the new coordinators. We should, when we encourage people to step forward as candidates, place emphasis, without being too forbidding, on those who have had some experience with copy editing during the drives and blitzes, as it seems that only those with such experience get much done. Dhtwiki (talk) 06:44, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

New page for nominations and voting for July to December 2025 term

I have created the page for the second-half term of 2025. Please check for accuracy and completeness. Nominations should go live in a few minutes! Dhtwiki (talk) 23:49, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Problematic references in backlog drive articles

I'm now editing my 2nd article in the May drive; and as happened in my 1st article, I found problems with the references, plus in this case a bibliography section as well.

1- Am I remembering correctly that when we edit articles for drives, we aren't required to edit anything other than the text in the body of the article, infoboxes, and photo captions?

2- If so, do we need to write an alert on our submissions of completion, or will another editor always come along behind us to do those fixes?

3- Also if so, is it really fair to post a {{GOCE reviewed}} template—which I didn't do on my March articles or my 1st May edit?

4- I almost forgot to add a question about text that's actually in the body of the article: what if a section really needs updating, such as where predictive research findings about costume sales are mentioned but so long ago as to be irrelevant unless put into a larger context? Augnablik (talk) 16:07, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

You must be referring to the Halloween costume article; if a particular article is under discussion, it helps to link to it. What are the problems with the References and Bibliography sections, as I don't see any other than some scrunched formatting under References? There is no requirement for copy editors to make sure all the references are correct, but where breakage is detected, there is no reason to not mend it if that can be done without much trouble. As far as writing an alert, one can mark citations with dead links ({{Dead link}}) or where referencing is otherwise insufficient ({{More footnotes needed}}, or {{Failed verification}}, among others); that is helpful, too. There is a difference between {{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors}}, which is what is to be put on the talk page after a copy edit, and {{GOCEreviewed}}, which is for when one doesn't see the need for a copy edit and doesn't perform one. There are templates specifically for noting that an update is needed, e.g. {{Update}}, {{Update section}}, and {{Update inline}}. I hope that helps. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:41, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Although it was because of my work on the Halloween costume article that I thought to raise the questions that I did, it wasn't to focus on that particular article but to get generic guidance. That's why I didn't link it.

Among the problems with the References section is that there is one reference mentioned with just the author's name but nothing else. The Bibliography section is poorly formatted for titles of the sources.

BUT NOW ...

As I just tried to publish my most recent edits, I received notification that someone else has done editing and I can't publish until the differences are resolved. And yet, I published the {{GOCE in use}} at the top of the article before I began working on it, so no one else should also be working on it. I would hate to lose all my edits, as I made a lot of formatting fixes on the Bibliography, and did some other fixes elsewhere. Could one of you coordinators step in here to shoo off the other editor before the 24-hour grace period ends in which unpublished edits can be made. Augnablik (talk) 10:48, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

@Augnablik: The "someone else" who edited the article was a bot which dated a maintenance tag. (Which is weird, I thought that bots ignored articles with in-use templates.) The easiest thing would be to revert the bot edit and make your changes. The bot won't be offended and will likely return a little later to make its edit again. – Reidgreg (talk) 13:37, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Not exactly my idea of the “easiest thing,” @Reidgreg, because I will lose all the edits I wanted to publish and have to make them all over again. Which I can do but prefer not to if there’s a way to avoid it. Augnablik (talk) 13:42, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

@Augnablik: Do you mean you would lose your edits from closing your web browser window in which the edits were made? Just copy that into a text editor, make the revert (restoring your last edited version of the article) and then edit again and paste back from the text editor. If it's giving you the edit-conflict split window, I'm sure you can just copy from one text box to the other but I don't recall the specifics of what it looks like. – Reidgreg (talk) 14:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

@Reidgreg, okay, it's finally sorted out ... thanks for stepping in about the editing conflict issue. Weirdness indeed was going on (perhaps Halloween gremlins had come out to haunt). For one thing, I found that the {{GOCE in use}} template had disappeared from the top of the article, so apparently that left the article open for the bot to sweep through.

For another thing, the directions at the top of the article about what to do in case of an editing conflict were confusing because of exactly where "below" really means the editor with the challenge has to go down the page. Anyway, after an hour or two I finally succeeded and now I'm ready to go on to a 3rd article in the current drive. Augnablik (talk) 19:12, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

The bot showed up to date your templates, which were either undated or included non-standard punctuation ({{...}}). Your {{GOCEinuse}} template, of which "GOCE in use" is an alias, was within "nowiki" tags; so, it wouldn't render nor probably be recognized by bots. Somewhere in the process, the "Short description" template was removed (and it should always be first in an article). Also, I see that User:Protobowladdict, whom I recognize as participating in guild activities, was editing, but without putting out the "inuse" template, which is really what it's there for, to keep guild members from stepping on each other's work during drives and blitzes. "Hutton" is probably Ronald Hutton, a scholar on pagan religions and folklore, but I couldn't decide which book of his applied. The {{Full citation needed}} template might be appropriate in such cases. Dhtwiki (talk) 06:47, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm still rather new to using templates, @Dhtwiki, so appreciate guidance about how to use them. At the same time, sometimes template-related things happen that I didn't request, which is really confusing. I should probably mention that I try to avoid using the SE except when absolutely necessary, as I find it hard to focus on text editing with so much "code clutter." Most of my need for template work, at least for references and comments like "citation needed," has been possible for me to do in the VE. Regarding the "Halloween Costumes" article:

— About what you said about the bot showing up to date my templates or fix non-standard punctuation ... other than retrieval dates I've placed on citation forms in the VE, the only other time I recall a date being involved on a template was on the Multiple Issues template I used at the top of the article to mention that there were major issues in need of fixing ... but that date was automatically added. I didn't add the parentheses around the curly brackets, though I do recall seeing that sort of thing several times when I went into the SE to look at something.

— Speaking of that particular template, you may have noticed when you went to look at the article that the text I typed on it appears in a different font than it should. I didn't ask for that. Any idea why that happened?

— About the {{GOCE in use}} coding with <nowiki>, I didn't put it there, at least not knowingly. Any idea why that happened?

— As for the missing short description, I also noticed on a VE form that one had been requested by another editor earlier but it wasn't appearing ... and I couldn't figure out how to make it do so. Any idea why that happened, and how to fix it? Augnablik (talk) 19:20, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

All templates that I have used have "date" parameters, which require "month year", e.g. "May 2025", as the info. In my experience, leave out that parameter and a bot will certainly date it. You like the visual editor? I don't know what "SE" stands for, but I prefer the non–visual editor. Unwanted wiki markup is apt to creep in; so, there should be a way to check in whatever editor you use. The font you speak of seems to be a function of the Multiple Issues template; I fussed a bit with it without changing the font or its initial indentaion. As far as the "in use" template, as I said before, unwanted wiki markup can creep in mysteriously, and it's just best to check. Dhtwiki (talk) 08:55, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Finding out about the possibility of unwanted wiki markup creeping in is an eye-opener, Dhtwiki ... wow. I've heard other editors disparage the Visual editor (VE) for various things ... even though yes, I've always preferred it over the Source editor (SE, in Wikipedia jargon I've now learned) because I really prefer avoiding all that code clutter. For me, it greatly interferes with keeping the big picture of an article in mind at the same time as working on smaller bits of it.

And I just assumed that if there were two choices of editor platforms, each would do everything the other did, even though differently. This experience on the May drive is making me rethink how to go on from here, and the insights you've been giving me on the "Halloween costumes" article will probably be what tips the scale for me!

Come to think of it, I've rarely needed to use templates other than the one for citations, which is easy to use and works fairly well to do everything I've needed so far. But it turns out that the form is really nothing more than a menu from which to choose various templates — we who use the VE are just not aware of it.

That said, however, I did check in the SE about the problems in the Multiple Issues template but couldn't find them ... Augnablik (talk) 10:25, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

@Dhtwiki, I removed the earlier Multiple Issues template and posted a new one, mentioning that there was a discussion on the Talk page about the article overlap, and the citation issue. Again the same problem arose with the font ...

...but this time I serendipitously succeeded in getting it to look the way it should by choosing the "collapsible" option for the template, the meaning of which I had no idea of until I saw the resultovid. It turns out that this hides the text of the message but gives the reader the option of clidking on a Show link to see it. If the reader does so, the link changes to Hide; and after reading the text shown, the reader can click on that to leave the template. Nice. Again, a great learning experience for me.

I still don't know, however, a way to put a template on an existing citation to indicate that there is missing information. Citations # 3 and 20, both for the author by the name of Hutton, provide nothing than the name. Augnablik (talk) 11:05, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

One other thing I couldn’t figure what to do about on this article: although the markup shows a short description was added at the too of the article, it doesn’t show. Augnablik (talk) 12:57, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

The template {{full citation needed}} may be helpful for incomplete citations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:14, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

But what I’m saying, @Jonesey95, is that I found there really is a short description provided in the markup code and yet it’s not appearing in the VE. 🤔 Augnablik (talk) 01:05, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

The short description template appears for me in Visual Editor. If I click on it and then click edit, I see a pop-up window that shows me the current short description: "Costumes worn on or around Halloween". The short description template's content does not normally display in reading mode. See Wikipedia:Short description for an explanation of what they are and how they work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:15, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Short description is not rendered by default, but it can be. It is supposed to be at the very top, per WP:LAYOUT. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

One of the editors who worked on the article earlier put a short description into the article. I saw it before, probably the VE form. But it's just not appearing on the article. And I see that Jonesey95 said, just above your message, that it doesn't normally display in reading mode, which seems completely counterintuitive to the whole idea of using a form to do things that those who use the SE would do there. Augnablik (talk) 17:44, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

I see that Jonesey also linked to the article telling what short description does. I don't see it myself but know it is important somehow and just have to respect that. Dhtwiki (talk) 06:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

@Dhtwiki and @Jonesey95, did it appear that I had any problem with the expectation of there being a short description on articles? Augnablik (talk) 08:58, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia has many features that work in mysterious ways. Happily, the site is pretty well documented. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:28, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

My apologies if I made it sound as if you did have a problem. I was talking about my having to take it on faith. However, the linked article does give rationale for why the template exists, rationale that I was not aware of. Dhtwiki (talk) 05:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

If you're avoiding the source editor because of markup clutter, you might consider enabling a syntax highlighter, such as User:Remember the dot/Syntax highlighter or User:Cacycle/wikEd. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:26, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

As I never heard of a syntax highlighter, @Dhtwiki, I had to look it up online … got it now … well, I appreciate your suggestion but my issue with the SE is not really having to differentiate one code from another. It’s having to see codes at all on the text I’m copy editing. For me they just get in the way visually.

By contrast, in a word processor — which is the same as the VE as far as look and feel — editors can easily see what they’re working on in relation to other text with a clear sense of how everything fits together part to whole. There’s no interruption of thought.

Someday, I know, our Wikitekkies will finish what they started with their VE overlay of markup code and make all editing work equally possible in both the SE and the VE. But for now, it’s frustrating to realize that working a lot in the SE is required in copy editing work for Wikipedia, which will cut down on my productivity. Augnablik (talk) 01:44, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

@Dhtwiki, I've just discovered how to add a major "critique template" to articles, and so that takes care of the first 3 questions in my original message. I can now simply mention remaining issues I notice in articles — like problems with references — and place it prominently so someone else will hopefully do something about the issues. Before being able to do that, I felt that the articles I edited were somehow not done thoroughly.

I see one drawback with doing that, though: for non-Wikipedia readers, it makes the encyclopedia look a little unprofessional. But it's probably better that we admit the issues rather than just leave them for readers with discerning eyes to discover them and wonder ... Augnablik (talk) 19:54, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Your use of the {{Multiple issues}} template is unusual, as it is almost always used to encompass several other challenge templates for a more compact or synoptic display. What you did with it probably belongs on the talk page. You are almost suggesting a {{Merge}}, given the amount of overlap you've detected, which would require discussion on appropriate talk pages in any case. Dhtwiki (talk) 06:55, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

@Dhtwiki ... by using the multiple issues template up top on the article, I thought that I was "encompassing several other challenge templates for a more compact or synoptic display." Is it only the overlap issue with the "Halloween" article that shouldn't have gone into that template, or do you think I still included too much and should have used smaller issues-related templates throughout the article?

As far as going to the article's Talk page and bringing up the overlap issue, with the suggestion of a possible merge, I never thought of that but will be happy to do so — although in what I say there, I'd like to recommend that:

• The simplest and most logical thing to do about the overlap is to remove the information about the origins of Halloween from the "Halloween Costume" article, pointing readers who want to know about those to the "Halloween" article
• The duplicate mask image should be used only in the "Halloween Costumes" article

Augnablik (talk) 19:48, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

You indeed should have included separate templates within the Multiple Issues one, or spread throughout the article. What you have now is text that belongs on the talk page, not at the top of the article (you earlier spoke of its not looking "unprofessional" and indeed it does at this point). You should move that text to the talk page, in order to preserve what you have found. I would not worry about article merges. You have done a thorough job copy editing, and that should be enough. Dhtwiki (talk) 09:24, 14 May 2025 (UTC) (edited 21:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC))

As I replied to another of your messages above, I did remove the Multiple Issues template and take the discussion of article overlap to the article's Talk page. Thank you for the little accolade on the "Halloween costume" work; it was the proverbial icing on the cake for me after a grueling climb up the learning curve in March and so far in May. Now, sitting down to rest on a higher plateau with the cake, I have the delightful feeling that things are coming together at last. Augnablik (talk) 12:01, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Hate to be a pest, but ...

I'm back with a question about markup text, but I'm sure I'll need to add a few more markup-related questions. The issue I'm mentioning below arose in an article titled Muziris.

There is a lot of extraneous line spacing in the article near block quotes and I want to delete it. When my cursor is on any of the extraneous spaces, I see a long, horizontal, mostly empty gray-bordered rectangle that, when clicked on, makes + Insert paragraph appear in sort of grayed-out lettering.

Since no coding appears in the Source editor in the corresponding locations, how to delete the line spacing?

Augnablik (talk) 18:00, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't see any extra whitespace. I did notice a few other things, though. It looks like you have added <s>...</s> tags around some text. We do not put that formatting in articles, typically. Also, italics do not belong around quotations, so that formatting can be removed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:31, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

This is really strange, @Jonesey95:

—You didn’t see all that line spacing?

—I didn’t add <s>…</s> tags (I don ‘t even know what they are>, or italicize any quotations. Augnablik (talk) 01:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Or perhaps I should put that second comment a little differently: I didn’t knowingly do those things. Augnablik (talk) 01:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

I do not see extra line spacing. You do appear to have added s tags, (that's a link to a diff of your edits) striking out text. I will remove them. I did not say that you added italic markup, but rather suggested that you remove it since you are copy editing the article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh, if <s> tags are strikeout, I DID add them around text in the lead that I want to pull out and incorporate elsewhere in the article, as the lead had been too long. I’d thought that strikeout on the superfluous text would remind me when I came back to the article to figure out where and how to reposition it. But I forgot that just because I’d put a {{GOCE in use}} template on the article didn’t mean that only I could see it. That was, I see now, rather silly on my part. 😔

I don’t see italics on the quoted text, though. It seems that at each of our ends, one of us sees something that the other doesn’t. We seem to have some gremlins playing around! Augnablik (talk) 03:21, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

The reason I didn’t know what <s> tags were is that I’ve been using the Visual editor to format with. Augnablik (talk) 03:34, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

@Jonesey95, do you still see italics around the quotations in "Muziris" that you mentioned earlier? That was one loose thread I wanted to be sure about before walking away from the article altogether.

Really appreciate your catch on the article Talk page. I've replied to you there. "Errrkkk" is all I can say. Augnablik (talk) 10:14, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

No. I removed the italics when I removed the strikeout markup. I fixed a few other formatting errors while I was there. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:15, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I really wonder why you saw italicized text and I didn’t, and how the italic markup got there in the first place. But all’s well that ends well. Naughtier Wikipedia gremlins have been known to play. Augnablik (talk) 14:44, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

All the gremlins seem to have left the "Muziris"article now. I just completed it with no more line space issues ... success getting the short description to show (even modified) ... and remaining markup questions seemingly taken care of.

♦I do have a totally different kind of question, though. The "Muziris" article had a lot of redundant and seemingly misplaced text, which I pulled together—even creating one or two new sections to handle everything in what seemed a little more logical way. I also did a lot of rewording and repositioning for better clarity and flow. Lastly, I made extensive suggestions on the article's Talk page about a couple of citation-related issues, and I offered one other non-major suggestion.

Because it was such a major edit on my part, I thought to share this with you coordinators in case you might want to give my work more than the usual amount of attention in its review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Augnablik (talk • contribs) 17:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

It looks fine to me; I saw nothing in your edits that wasn't an improvement (I assume that you changed era designators, e.g. BCE to BC, on the basis of the latter being the initial form used). You certainly have put in a lot of work and your talk page comments attest to that as well. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:27, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes, that article ended up being a "bear" to work on timewise; I had no idea at first of all that was going to be involved. And yes, format consistency was the reason for the change I made to the era designators (happy to know what those are called).

(I wonder why "Preceding unsigned comment added by Augnablik (talk • contribs)" got attached to the message you replied to, as my Wiki identification always gets automatically attached to my messages.) Augnablik (talk) 00:40, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

I added an {{Unsigned}} template when I encountered your unsigned post dated more than two hours previously. Anything automatic should have happened by then. I thought that I might be preempting User:SineBot which automatically signs posts for newcomers who forget and experienced editors who ask for its monitoring to continue (such as myself, who signs manually with four tildes but sometimes forgets). Dhtwiki (talk) 09:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC) (edited 22:23, 19 May 2025 (UTC))

PS. I added your name and date-span of your editing to the talk page copy-edit template, which is usual. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:30, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

I didn't realize that we were supposed to do that. Thanks ... I'll do the same on my other earlier edited articles. Augnablik (talk) 00:49, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

@Augnablik: I have now noticed that the entry for Muziris, at the requests page, hasn't been marked either as being worked on or done. You should place a working template, found at the top of the edit window or typed-in manually, when you begin, so that others will know that the article is taken; and now, if you are finished, there should be a done template, so that the article can be archived. Dhtwiki (talk) 04:09, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

I had a GOCE in use template there while I was working on the article, but removed it because I completed the editing. I see from the "Instructions to copy editors" that I just went back to in connection with your other comment in my most recent question below that I should have been adding a Done template for all the editing I did in these two drives I've worked on. Nobody caught that till you did just now. Sorry, wish I'd gotten caught. Us new-to-GOCE editors probably need to be watched with eagle eyes for awhile ...Augnablik (talk) 04:18, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Now I wonder if the three articles I copy edited in March and the four I've done in May so far ever got archived. Augnablik (talk) 04:29, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Requests and articles tagged for copy editing (i.e. articles on the backlog) are treated differently. The GOCEinuse template is for the backlog, because as long as the copy edit tag exists the article will show in the relevant category, and that template is the best way to tell other copy editors that a particular backlog article is being worked on. You can use the inuse tag for requests, but marking such an article on the requests page is the most effective means of telling others that a request has been taken, as well as necessary for a request to be automatically archived (backlog articles are not archived; removal of the c/e tag is all that is necessary). Dhtwiki (talk) 09:58, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

But doesn't choosing an article in the "Totals" section automatically dim the titles on the Requests page? That's what I noticed yesterday had happened to the two Requests titles that I chose to work on or completed. It was the first time I'd ever seen dimmed titles there. Augnablik (talk) 18:12, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Just to confirm something: when we finish copy editing an article, we show it as Completed in our totals even if we're engaged in discussion with one or more authors on the article's Talk page ... and we can work on a new article? Augnablik (talk) 18:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Adding a "Completed" template to the drive page, where each signed-up editor has an entry, is useful only for calculating barnstars. It does nothing to the requests page, where you must add separate "Working" and "Done" templates under the article you are working on or have completed, else someone else will think that article is still in need of a copy edit, which is potentially a huge waste of time, especially if you have removed the GOCEinuse template at that article. If you have completed copy editing an article, you can continue to edit it and engage in discussions with the requester, while you move on to another article, but you need to add the "Done" template under the request, so that the article can be archived. I have added "Done" templates for a couple of your articles, as well as a "Working" template to a third; but I hope you will learn to do these chores yourself. Dhtwiki (talk) 05:38, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, @Dhtwiki. I’m sure trying. To learn, that is. I just commented to my mentor, though, that here in the Guild I feel back in the toddler stage I left only about 6 months ago for tweenhood in Wikipedia at large. Just when I’d begun to feel I was now starting early teenhood there, it’s a different story here.

You mentioned placing a Working template on one of my articles … but I purposely stopped working for now at 5 completed articles. I might pick up again later in the month. Augnablik (talk) 07:46, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Copy editor-main author interaction

On the instructions for copy editing during current drives, I don't see anything about whether it's okay for a copy editor to interact with a main author of an article. I thought to ask, because it suddenly occurred to me that for my 4th May drive article I chose one by an author of an article I copy edited back in March, who contacted me at the completion of the article to thank me as well as ask a few questions, and we got involved in quite a bit of friendly interaction ... which I would like to do once again with his new article I'm working on.

I assume this copy editor-author interaction is okay, since the author I'm referring to was already a long-time editor at the time and would presumably "know the ropes." But the amount of friendly interaction that we had, plus more about COI that I've come to know, made me decide to pull up another chair in what I now think of as the GOCE Teahouse. Augnablik (talk) 07:55, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh, yes, especially when it's cordial (and sometimes it can be less than that). Are you working the requests page, as that is where it's absolutely encouraged and where there is at least one template, and maybe two, to facilitate such interactions? It's less likely to happen when copy editing the backlog, but it wouldn't be a bad thing if it happened there, as long as it's constructive. Dhtwiki (talk) 02:40, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, @Dhtwiki. At first, I wasn’t aware of the template(s) you mentioned to facilitate interaction. When I went back to the Requests page to re-check, I didn’t see one either … until I noticed the greenish rectangle saying,“Instructions for copy editors,” which I remembered looking at back in March when I first participated in a GOCE drive, but hadn’t revisited.

When I clicked on it, I saw what you were referring to — though described simply as “may be helpful to do” guidance. I probably forgot about it because it’s not in plain view.

This reminds me to mention something else that would be valuable to include in the “Instructions for copy editors”: a notice that on the Requests page, all titles of the articles that are being worked on or are completed will appear slightly dimmed to alert editors to leave them alone. The contrast between the dimmed and non-dimmed titles is so low that it’s easy to miss, as I did — all the more because even if I had noticed it, I wouldn’t have immediately known what it meant.

It would be helpful to do the same thing with the older articles too, so as to avoid editors doing overlapping work. Augnablik (talk) 04:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

The only difference in intensity of article titles that I'm aware of is due to whether an editor has visited an article, whereby that article will appear as a more intense color (blue on my current machine). Prevention of overlapping work is what the various templates mentioned above are to accomplish. Dhtwiki (talk) 10:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC) (edited 01:46, 23 May 2025 (UTC))

That’s exactly my point. It’s important that editors understand this. Those new to GOCE probably won’t unless it’s called to their attention. Augnablik (talk) 13:13, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

Drive submission dates

Is there an end date in a drive month for c/e requests to be received and posted for Guild editors to work on for inclusion in that month's drive? Augnablik (talk) 05:22, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. Miniapolis 17:16, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

The drive ends at 11:59 PM UTC on the last day of the month. Any copy edits that are complete before the end of the drive (i.e. the article has been completely copy edited before 11:59 PM UTC) should be added to the drive page within about 24 hours of the end of the drive. Barnstars are given out a few days after the end of the drive; if your contributions are not listed on the drive page at that time, they will not be included in the barnstar calculations.

If you have only partially copy edited an article when the drive ends, you should not include it on the drive page. Happy editing! – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:31, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

I think it's sorted out now, thanks. I can see the question was a little confusing. Augnablik (talk) 22:55, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

My view is to allow partial totals, as long as the editor conscientiously finishes the article; a partial total can be calculated in various ways. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:44, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Interesting about partial totals, @Dhtwiki. That wasn't what made me ask the question you responded to but it's useful information. What did make me ask it was that 4 or 5 days ago in the Teahouse, someone wanted to know how long it might take to get a copy edit after a request she planned to make because she'd heard it could take quite long ... so I was thinking to alert her to the Guild's May drive even so late in month with the idea that if there were no deadline for posting requests in the drive month and if one of the GOCE editors were looking so late in the month for an article to edit found hers of interest to choose before the drive ended, there might be some hope for her to get a quick edit.

Although I knew the strategy was a long shot, I felt it might be worth telling her about. But as it turned out, she wasn't as ready to submit the request as I'd thought. Augnablik (talk) 15:38, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

I misunderstood your question. In general, requests at WP:GOCER are worked on in the order they are received, but editors are free to choose any article they want to edit. Anyone can see the current approximate wait time by looking at the age of the oldest requests. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:07, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

We have, for recent iterations of the drives and blitzes, included all requests, although in the past, IIRC, we have placed limits that excluded recent requests. Your suggested strategy, of making a request to be possibly granted during an ongoing drive, might have the effect of an early copy edit, although I myself don't like to see older requests languish while more recent ones are taken up. You could also suggest that requesters take the delay to themselves find out what might be wrong with their articles. For an author, flush with the excitement of having produced a draft, to step away from an article and then come back to it with a reader's critical eye, and with an eye to the necessity of rewriting, should be one of the more effective ways of improving any article. Dhtwiki (talk) 03:39, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Well, a confession: since the editor in the Teahouse gave a link to the article—I guess in her sandbox—I had already followed a link and taken a quick look at it. After noting that it was well written, that’s when the long-shot strategy came to mind. The article would have appealed to another editor with an interest in history. Augnablik (talk) 05:25, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Archive

What—literally—happens to articles when they’re archived? Augnablik (talk) 01:41, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

On the requests page, it's not the article that's archived but the request-page entry, which is deleted to remove clutter (but which still exists, through the page's edit history) and which is given a more synoptic entry in the archives that are accessed through a menu near the upper right corner of the page. A difference between requests and articles on the backlog is that for the former all marking of "working" and "done" is handled at the request page, not at the article itself, which shouldn't require any notice in order to notify other copy editors of its already being copy edited (I only make use of the GOCEinuse template when I'm editing the backlog, although there's nothing wrong with using it if you want). There are special templates to communicate with the requester, on their talk page, that their article is being worked on, although requesters are often alert to the status of their requests via the requests page itself. Dhtwiki (talk) 04:02, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

June 2025 blitz

I have started a new blitz page, the blitz to run from the 15th to the 21st, with an emphasis on the October – November 2023 backlog (11 and 31 articles, respectively), as well as all requests (2 from March, 8 from April, 22 from May, and 13, so far, from June, discounting those being worked on and likely to be finished by the start of the blitz (2 articles), and accounting for one or two articles that are questionable requests). We have discussed having a short-articles theme, but that seems likely for August, rather than now. Since I am rather late getting this started, if it is to start on the 15th, I may be rather quick in announcing it, even without waiting for feedback here. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)