Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chennai/Collaborations of the month/Nominations

Two articles for COTM
Dear WikiProject Chennai Editors. With the kind of development one can see in Chennai Central article over the past month due to the collaboration, which has made it increase almost three-fold, we can see that articles of similar kind should be taken for COTM, since they can be improved substantially. The efforts are much prolific and results are encouraging than with solely working on an already improved one (like Vandalur Zoo). Now I realise what User Anbu suggested initially is correct—taking one already improved article (a B-class one) and another yet-to-be-improved one (a start/stub one). This way, I think, we can improve the start-class article substantially and tweak the B-class one to the GA level. Do you all think this will work? Can we nominate two articles this time, or should we solely concentrate on a single article at a time? Rasnaboy (talk) 16:28, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I would say that this is indeed a reasonable success. But I also doubt if there would be enough bandwidth for two articles since only four of us are actively involved so far. We can take up 2 articles per month, if we get atleast 6 or 7 active participants. -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 21:59, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I feel we can take two at a time if we are nominating a B-class article that has so little to do except for rewording and editing. The problem I percieve is that if we keep nominating the prime articles, it would take years to touch neighborhoods. It is not a bad idea to to take a second article, a start-class article, and move it to C-class at least. By that way, w will have 12 more c-class articles in a year and we can take it from there. Thought the number of active users is less, Chennai COTM is a success story.--Challengethelimits (talk) 01:23, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I agre with two at a time, but unlike INCOTM where one regular article is taken and one is taken aiming for GA/FA, I think both should be treated on par. Two awesome articles are better than one. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 18:22, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * If two-article consensus is reached, I would like to suggest George Town, Chennai. It's historic, important, but has not-so-developed article.--Challengethelimits (talk) 03:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

My point was to get two articles. Like this month, CHennai Airport and Corp, next month Georgetown and List of Mayors? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:04, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * If four of us are going to increase our load from one article to two articles, then I think we need to redefine the mission/purpose of this collaboration - from "getting article to GA/FA" to "improving articles". In a way, that makes sense. Chennai and Chennai Central has benefited more from this collaboration than Vandalur Zoo. I believe, taking an article to GA, requires a bit of personal attention from the major contributor rather than a collaboration. A collaboration works really well in the case of taking start-class to B-class rather than B-class to GA-class. -- Anbu121 ( talk me ) 13:22, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * We can collaborate to reach B-class. After this we can individually aim for GA or FA class. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:07, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Challengethelimits (talk • contribs) 11:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)