Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Handbook


 * Please see the Academy course for coordinators for general information and advice.

Coordinator tasks

 * These tasks should be done as often as needed—ideally, on a daily basis.


 * Assessment
 * Monitor the daily assessment log. The main things to look for:
 * Articles being removed. This is usually legitimate (due to merges or non-military articles getting untagged), but is sometimes due to vandalism or broken template code.
 * Articles being moved to "GA-Class" and higher quality. These ratings need to correspond to the article's status in the GA and FA lists or the A-Class project review.
 * Deal with any new assessment requests and the backlog of unassessed articles.


 * A-Class review
 * For each ongoing A-Class review:
 * Determine whether the review needs to be closed and archived, per the criteria here.
 * If a review has been open for a month without at least three editors commenting, leave a reminder note on the main project talk page, using the following boilerplate:
 * If an article has been put up for A-Class review in the past and you receive a request for assistance per WP:MHR for a fresh review, follow the procedure below for creating an A-Class review or reappraisal. This will make way for the normal A-Class review initiation process, so advise the nominator to initiate per the instructions.


 * Quarterly Reviewing Awards


 * At the end of each quarter, all editors that complete at least one A-Class review receive a Milhist reviewing award. Create a new thread on the Coordinators' talk page and paste the following boilerplate into the body, leaving the subject line empty: . Save the thread, reopen it and change the months and year in the subject line and table, add a comment under the table, sign and save the thread again. Then tally the qualifying reviews:
 * Tally A-Class Reviews. As only those editors who complete at least one Milhist A-Class review receive an award, start by tallying them. Go to  (inserting the correct year) and click on the links to check all the A-Class articles that were promoted, failed, kept or demoted in the relevant quarter . Tally the number of articles reviewed by each editor. One suggested method is to use a simple pen-and-paper tally of usernames as you scroll through the relevant archive; another is to save the relevant reviews into a word processor and delete all content except the usernames of the reviewers, then tally from there. Regardless of which method is chosen, it can be time consuming so you may need to do it over several sessions. Once done, add each editor who completed an A-Class review to the User column of the Quarterly Reviewing Table, and add one point to the ACR column for each article that editor reviewed.
 * Tally Good Article Reviews. Methods are to go to Good articles/Warfare revision history for the quarter and tally the articles added by each editor listed in the Quarterly Reviewing Table or to use the Pages Created tool to isolate GA nomination pages created by a specific user. Add one point to the GA column for each MilHist article that those editors reviewed. Note that the accuracy of this method relies upon reviewers listing GAs per instructions.
 * Tally Peer Reviews. Go to Peer review/Archive and click on the links to open the archive pages for the relevant quarter. Check the talk page of each article to determine whether it falls under MilHist. For each article that does, check whether it was reviewed by an editor listed in the Quarterly Reviewing Table. If so, add one point to the PR column for each MilHist article that editor reviewed.
 * Tally Featured Article Reviews. Go to Featured_article_candidates/Featured_log and Featured_article_candidates/Archived_nominations, and click on the links to open the archive of review pages for the relevant quarter. Check the talk page of each article to determine whether it falls under MilHist. For each article that does, check whether it was reviewed by an editor listed in the Quarterly Reviewing Table. If so, add one point to the FAC column for each MilHist article that editor reviewed.
 * Tally the total number of points for each editor and add them to the Total column of the Quarterly Reviewing Table.
 * Award all reviewers in accordance with the following schedule (the award templates are all available under "Military history awards" below):
 * 15+ points – the WikiChevrons
 * 8–14 points – the Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history)
 * 4–7 points – the Milhist reviewing award (2 stripes)
 * 1-3 points – the Milhist reviewing award (1 stripe)
 * Sign the Awarded column of the Quarterly Reviewing Table for each editor to signify that the award has been presented.

Quarterly reviewing awards are posted on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Awards page by the MilHistBot. As with other awards, change the status from "nominated" to "approved" to approve the award.


 * Member affairs
 * Invite editors to join the project, using the following boilerplate:
 * Welcome anybody who joins the project, using the following boilerplate:


 * Miscellaneous
 * Vote on any open proposals to award the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves and approve any A-Class medal or A-Class cross nominations.
 * Update the monthly newsletter with new developments within the project.
 * Verify entries in the monthly article writing contest, hand out prizes, and update the monthly scoreboard and the newsletter accordingly.
 * Fix the WPMILHIST invocation syntax on any articles in Category:Military history articles needing attention to tagging.