Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Coordinators/Archives/2020

Coordinators emeriti
As has decided not to serve as a coordinator this term, I would like to nominate them to join the Coordinators Emeriti, with their permission and the understanding that they can return to being an active coordinator at any time in the future. Regards, and happy New Year! Tdslk (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I accept your nomination,, with thanks. Happy New Year and all the best,  Mini  apolis  22:08, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Seconded; congratulations and thanks for all of your hard work at the Guild. Happy New Year and all that lark. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  00:46, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Full support. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:03, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Splendid idea. BlueMoonset (talk) 08:29, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support on the understanding that Miniapolis remains eligible to return as lead or assistant coordinator. (I don't want this to be an enforced retirement!) – Reidgreg (talk) 14:13, 1 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Totally support the nomination. Happy New Year to you all. Twofingered Typist (talk) 16:17, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you all. If and when I'm a coordinator again, I'll make the necessary adjustments . Happy New Year, see you around and all the best,  Mini  apolis  16:59, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Sadly the Guild can't afford a pension but we had a collection in the office and bought you this cheap $2.59 plastic clock lovely retirement gift. Don't forget the Hall of Fame Bar is always open. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  18:41, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * And you'll see me at the end (of the HOFB, that is, near the zinfandel). Many thanks for the thoughtful tchotchke gift . All the best,  Mini  apolis  00:34, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Embassy?
Hi coordinators! I had an idea for a task that we could give to two-thirds users that could take some work off the coordinators. If we had these editors act like "diplomats" and arrange various drives/blitzes with different wikiprojects. I just really loved the idea of a collab with MILHIST and was wondering if anyone else would want to have more collaborations with other projects. If we had these assigned editors arrange those and report back to the coordinators, I think that would work out fine. Thoughts? This is just an idea please don't judge. Thanks! Puddleglum  2.0  06:20, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I like the idea of collaborating with other Wikiprojects on drives etc. It might work if 2/3 of this project's "participants" showed up to participate.  Baffle☿gab  10:35, 2 January 2020 (UTC)


 * We could send out a MMS notification to everyone, that might attract more people. I think if people knew that out was happening, more might come. I do agree that there are a lot of inactive members and members ergo don't actually want to participate. I think it might be worth a try though, we should see. Thanks! Puddleglum  2.0  15:22, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I think it's beyond my pay grade so I'll stick to copy-editing and looking after REQ etc. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  16:11, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I could do it; I write the Wikiproject report for the Signpost, so I have a bit of experience interacting with WikiProject members. I just wanted to know if coordinators were on board with the idea. Thanks for the input! Puddleglum  2.0   19:26, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I seem to remember an upcoming WP:MILHIST collaboration (in March, I think), so maybe we shouldn't take too much extra on right now. All the best,  Mini  apolis  21:36, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Some of the earlier blitzes did have themes around specific Wikiprojects, but I don't think we had much participation from editors who were not already Guild regulars. We'd also need to find a project that was both active and broad enough that there were sufficient tagged articles for a blitz. Maybe we should see how the MILHIST collab goes before lining up any more. Tdslk (talk) 02:40, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree to wait for the Milhist drive, see how that works and what we can learn from it. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC),
 * Sounds like a plan! I believe that is in March, am I correct? Thanks, Puddleglum  2.0   05:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

January drive
Probably time to start thinking about it. How about the June–August backlog and all requests? Happy New Year and all the best,  Mini  apolis  02:40, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives/January 2020. Improvements to the page are welcome. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:03, 27 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Looks good to me. Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:47, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Sounds fine to me too. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  20:28, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Barnstars
Does anyone have script access to calculate the January drive barnstars? – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:13, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

2020 Archive and 2019 Annual Report
I'm probably missing it, but where are the 2020 GOCE requests being archived? There's no year/table for 2020 I can find, yet I see the bot has been active.

Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:34, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * It's been archiving (thank God), and I've added 2020 to the archives template. Never a dull moment . All the best,  Mini  apolis  23:38, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Baffle gab created it at the beginning of November. Thanks for the wake-up call!  One December Request left and I get to crunch the numbers from last year. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:04, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've prodded A21Sauce, who accepted the request, resulting in one further edit, but nothing since. I'll leave t a few more days then do it myself to get it moving. That's pretty good though; monthly sections aren't usually cleared until late month! Cheers,  Baffle☿gab 
 * Dec 2019 is now finished; crunch away! :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  06:53, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Crunching is done for the annual report. I think the only content that might be added is a possible brief message for "Plans for 2020". Could use a general copy edit for consistency (I think capital-R Requests for the Requests page but lower-case requests for the requests on the Requests page. Yeeps.) and tweak the chart and table placement so it doesn't look too horrible. (Maybe remove the older data from the crowded request-completion-time graph?) – Reidgreg (talk) 21:50, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Great job; thanks! I used Clear to make the table really float. All the best,  Mini  apolis  23:29, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks all; it's looking good now, if anyone wants to add or correct anything please go ahead. there's a topsheet here. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  03:57, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If we're thinking about plans for 2020, as I mentioned in my coordinator nomination May will be the 10th anniversary of our first drive, and I think it would be nice to celebrate that achievement. That's a long time for a Wikipedia project to last, and we should be proud of it. Tdslk (talk) 05:13, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Good idea, and we have plenty of time to plan something appropriate. FWIW, I think the backlog was over 4,000 when I came in in early 2011. All the best,  Mini  apolis  14:50, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thirded; perhaps we could make a special barnstar award to commemorate the occasion; it could then be deprecated or deleted. Just a thort, Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  05:00, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I like it! I think I'm at seven years, and I have been impressed with our stamina during that time and grateful to those who came before. I will try to make some time to edit the newsletter in the next 24 hours. Feel free to chip in additional ideas about plans for 2020 here, and I'll write them up. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:19, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you all for your patience. I carved out some time today to tidy the 2019 annual report and added a few notes of my own. Anyone want to give it a quick read-through to find the remaining things that I missed, or errors I introduced? – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:31, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Jonesey; I've glanced through the text and done a little tidying (removed odd commas, tweaked text, etc.) and I'm happy to leave it alone now, though further checks are encouraged. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  05:33, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The September and November drives had skimpier descriptions than the other months, so I added a bit to both. Hope this works. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:13, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Jonesey! I did a teensy bit of ce, and moved the annual leaderboard down with a little added clarification.  (It includes blitzes and requests, not just drives). – Reidgreg (talk) 19:09, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Good catches, all. I knew I had left behind some errors. It looks great now. Unless there is any objection, I'll mass-message the topsheet to our mailing list in a few hours. Check and edit the topsheet if you want; once it is delivered to editors' talk pages, it is much more difficult to modify. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:24, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

✅. I have sent it. Mass messaging always makes me nervous, since it is hard to fix problems, but I checked everything a couple of times. Thanks for the collaboration, everyone, and happy 2020! – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:11, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

February blitz (and January barnstars)
February is short! We'll either have to start our drive in about 24 hours, or do it in a week, but we can't wait longer than that. Ideas for a theme? – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:14, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Food and drink are usually popular, but I've no idea what's in the backlog. I know we've done those a few times. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:38, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Articles tagged in August (22 left) and requests? I think it's fine to start it in a week. Tdslk (talk) 02:46, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I agree with Tdslk. All the best,  Mini  apolis  14:32, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree with Tdslk, 16–22 Feb should be good. BTW, is anyone able to run the barnstar script on the January drive page?  I usually check it manually, but without the script results to check against I end up having to do the manual count twice to guard against data entry errors (or more often if my figures don't match). – Reidgreg (talk) 15:05, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Confession: I've never learned how to run the barnstar script. Is there a guide out there? Tdslk (talk) 16:25, 9 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I can email you the script as a .txt file (I think most email filters block .vbs files) along with Jonesey's instructions, which are based on 's. When you get the file, change the .txt extension to .vbs and you should be good to go; you'll need to change the drive month in three places in the script (easy to find, since two are in block letters) and find a common path for the script and the input and output files. The first few times I ran it were kinda harrowing, but it gets easier with time. All the best,  Mini  apolis  18:25, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I'll give the script a stab at the end of March! Tdslk (talk) 04:19, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll take care of it tomorrow (EST). All the best,  Mini  apolis  00:18, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

And it's done. All the best,  Mini  apolis  03:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Miniapolis. Awards distributed (thanks Jonesey for sending mine), except for, who is under an indefinite block and I'm unsure what to do. – Reidgreg (talk) 17:25, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I gave out a barnstar to in good faith. I can't make heads or tails of Sockpuppet investigations/UnnamedUser/Archive or of the edits by the accounts on that page. It seems like a good editor decided to play around, or their computer was hacked, or someone in the same IP range is messing around and UnnamedUser got swept up in the dragnet. We might find out eventually, but given UnnamedUser's long history of good edits, including those with the GOCE, I am assuming good faith until I see better evidence of bad behavior. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:00, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I've had a bit of contact with them and would also tend to AGF. I knew that they changed their account name from AnUnnamedUser at one point, and had been making good edits on either side of that change. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:10, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised and saddened to see that account is globally blocked for cross-wiki vandalism. :(  Baffle☿gab  20:24, 10 February 2020 (UTC)


 * FWIW, I also agree with Tdslk. I checked UnnamedUser's account just now and see no sign it is blocked. Perhaps I'm missing something. Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:44, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * There are some links at Special:Contributions/UnnamedUser, indicating a global block – Reidgreg (talk) 14:56, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Could be a compromised account, but I've seen enough "good" editors go off the rails to draw no conclusions. Jonesey's link to the SPI, unfortunately, speaks for itself. All the best,  Mini  apolis  15:28, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Wired Magazine Article
An interesting article from Wired magazine on our (and others') efforts on Wikipedia.

https://www.wired.com/story/wikipedia-online-encyclopedia-best-place-internet/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

Twofingered Typist (talk) 18:52, 21 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Nice. I'll have to forward that to some folks.  I often think of Wikipedia being like a mullet:  business up front (mainspace) and a party in the back (talk and project pages).  Also a big fan of Lamest edit wars. – Reidgreg (talk) 14:32, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Good to have a reason to be cheerful Thanks for the link and all the best,  Mini  apolis  22:53, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

March drive
Thanks Bafflegab for setting up the March drive page. We could probably do the oldest three months (Sept–Nov) plus requests. There's also been the idea of a joint drive with WP:MILHIST, which had been floated around since last July. Not really much direction on that, though it's been suggested that we could pull some articles from Category:Military history articles needing attention to grammar by task force for general copy edit, or they might be able to provide a list of articles of B class and above. – Reidgreg (talk) 18:08, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Those months look good. Anyone want to reach out to MILHIST for a list of articles for our April Blitz? – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:35, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I reached out to them at a couple weeks ago but missed their reply; have given another shout-out.  is a co-ordinator there and may be able to help. – Reidgreg (talk) 19:07, 24 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Greetings all. The suggestion is that MilHist puts up a list of the 95 Category:Indian military history articles currently needing attention to grammar as part of our annual drive - this takes place in March. Points, and hence barnstars, can be gained for copy editing them. They will all be stub/start class. Possibly they could also be advertised on your drive and barnstars also gained there; but that is, obviously, over to you. Pinging in, MilHist lead coordinator, to run an eye over the suggestion.
 * It is possible that a mixed approach will introduce some MilHist members to GOCE, either as copy editors or as Requesters. I am not so sure about travel in the other direction, but anything to help get out backlog of articles deficient in B4 down would be much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:57, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * That sounds reasonable Gog, though we'd probably want to triage the list of articles for suitability for c/e before we start. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  20:12, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * It would be great to bring in some GOCE members to cross-pollinate and reduce some of our backlog in b4 (grammar). Your help would be greatly appreciated. Indian articles are generally a good fit for a c/e, and it is one of our more active task forces. If you were to triage and reduce the list from 95, we could nominate a second category for consideration if you felt that would be a good stretch. Depends on what you think is doable. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 21:07, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this sounds like fun and would prefer to have it as part of our April one-week blitz rather than our March month-long drive. A one-week trial gives us time to play around and possibly fail at something without it being a spectacular month-long flameout. If it goes well and we think we can sustain it for a month, we could partner again in July. If a week seems more suitable, we could go again in June. I am willing to be persuaded away from my opinion if people have strong feelings that we should go for it in March. (For the MILHIST folks, I am the GOCE's lead coordinator for the first half of the year. This position gives me some responsibility but no actual power [note the lack of capital letters in the position title; that's a clue]. We have four other coordinators and tend to make decisions via friendly consensus and happy shrugs.)– Jonesey95 (talk) 21:46, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

FWIW, I agree with Jonesey that we should ease into the Indian MILHIST articles for the April blitz. Assuming that the collaboration goes well (as I'm sure it will), we can roll up our sleeves for a month in May or July. All the best,  Mini  apolis  02:13, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * And I also agree. Military history sounds better suited for a blitz than a drive (no pun intended). Tdslk (talk) 03:01, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Fourthed (I think!) for time reasons, though we could make MILHIST-tagged articles themes of more than one blitz or drive. It could then go out in the March newsletter. I'm happy to go with consensus on this anyway. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  08:25, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Fifthed! Let's ease into it. 14:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay. Since I'll probably forget about this again, I prepared a tentative blitz list, marking off some of those I felt are not appropriate for copy edit. – Reidgreg (talk) 17:15, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * That's all looking good and sensible. Thanks guys. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:22, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Possible list for a future blitz

 * 1st Armoured Division (India)
 * 1st Indian Cavalry Division
 * 2nd Portuguese India Armada (Cabral, 1500)
 * 9th Infantry Division (Bangladesh)
 * 10th Indian Infantry Division
 * 10th Infantry Division (Bangladesh)
 * 20th Lancers (Pakistan)
 * 41st Armoured Regiment (India)
 * 98th Composite Brigade (Bangladesh) stub
 * 1931 Kashmir agitation
 * 2014–2015 India–Pakistan border skirmishes
 * Abhinandan Varthaman
 * Aeronautical Development Establishment
 * Agni-I
 * Agni-III
 * Agra Fort needs more citations
 * Air Force Technical College, Bangalore unreferenced
 * Amogha missile
 * António Galvão
 * Army Aviation Corps (India)
 * Ashok K. Mehta
 * Aviation in India
 * Bareilly Airport
 * Barrackpore Air Force Station more footnotes
 * Battle of Beicang
 * Battle of Chillianwala more citations
 * Battle of Pokoku and Irrawaddy River operations more citations
 * Bhim self-propelled howitzer
 * Bibi Sahib Kaur stub
 * Bihar Regiment
 * Cantonment
 * Chetak
 * Commandant of Indian Naval Academy list
 * D. P. K. Pillay
 * Defence of Kamalpur
 * Duarte Pacheco Pereira more citations
 * Fakhrul Azam stub
 * Firangoji Narsala single source
 * Guskhara Airfield stub
 * HAL AMCA
 * HAL HJT-36 Sitara
 * HAL HT-2 stub
 * Hardev Pal Nayyar more citations
 * Harlow PC-5
 * Hathazari Airfield
 * Indian Army
 * Indian Military Academy
 * INS Kabra (T76) more citations
 * IV Corps (India)
 * Jaivana Cannon largely unsourced, proposed merge
 * Jalore Fort
 * James Morris Colquhoun Colvin
 * James Stuart (British Army officer, born 1741)
 * Jat Regiment
 * Jean-Baptiste Ventura
 * Jean-François Allard
 * Kambampati Nachiketa
 * Kargil Review Committee
 * Khan Bahadur Sher Jang more citations
 * Ledo Airfield stub
 * Lewis Heath
 * Madras War Cemetery
 * Malik Kafur
 * Manek Burj
 * Maratha–Mysore War
 * MARCOS
 * Modern Sub Machine Carbine
 * Nag (missile)
 * National Security Guard
 * Nawadih Airfield stub
 * No. 4 Squadron IAF more citations
 * No. 16 Squadron IAF
 * No. 26 Squadron IAF
 * One Rank, One Pension neutrality disputed
 * Operation Raahat
 * Operation Safe Homecoming
 * Operation Sukoon
 * P-15 Termit
 * Pandaveswar Airfield stub
 * Parbati Charan Das single source, multiple issues
 * Polygar no citations
 * Prakash Gokarn single source
 * R. Hari Kumar
 * Rajendra Singh (flag officer) more footnotes
 * Rana Chhina
 * Red Fort
 * Sarang display team
 * Sena Medal more citations
 * Seymour Expedition
 * Shailesh Tinaikar
 * Siege of Trichinopoly (1741) stub
 * SS-45 Missile unreferenced stub
 * Tatya Tope
 * V. K. Singh
 * Yogendra Singh Yadav

March Requests in the March drive?
On another matter altogether, I wanted to suggest adding the March 2020 Requests to the February ones; at the moment, there are only nine February 2020 requests that haven't yet attracted a reviewer, and those and any added between now and the 29th are unlikely to last very long. (In January, we did both December 2019 and January 2020, so doing February and March 2020 this time also makes sense.) However, not being a coordinator, I didn't want to make the change without approval of those who are. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:40, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Done. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:59, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
 * A request drought? Surely not! Could we reach our record low of six requests in Dec 2015? Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  02:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC)


 * We are down to four three open requests as of 27/02 Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:32, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

March newsletter
Thanks to Reidgreg for adding the Jan and Feb stats. I've done the Progress Report update and it's ready to send here. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  01:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Baffle! I reworked the progress a bit, if you'd like to check that. Otherwise, looks good to me. – Reidgreg (talk) 13:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Sent. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  15:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem; thanks both. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:44, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

March end of drive
That was a productive drive! A little social distancing and suddenly the backlog is barely three figures. At the end of January I offered to try to run the word count script myself, so unless someone else really wants to do it, I'll volunteer for that. Stay healthy, everyone! Tdslk (talk) 03:03, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Tdslk. Let me know if you need help with the script. I don't have access to a Windows computer, but I have run it a bunch of times and have instructions lying around here somewhere. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Miniapolis sent me a copy of your instructions in January, so no need to dig them out. Regards, Tdslk (talk) 05:26, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * There were a couple failed reviews on the drive. It might be good if we could hold a day or so to check if those articles were brought up to an acceptable standard and maybe quality check a few more articles. (And whether the last  articles were completed or not.)  Please discuss at the drive talk page where there was some previous discussion. Thanks. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:03, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Barnstars
I have completed the March barnstar tables, making a few adjustments for quality issues per the drive talk page. It was my first time using the script, so if someone could check that I didn't majorly mess things up, that would be great. Thanks, Tdslk (talk) 19:06, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Tdslk, I'll double-check the figures. – Reidgreg (talk) 19:59, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks good, will start distributing the barnstars now. – Reidgreg (talk) 21:27, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, . I'm inordinately excited that, although I've taken part in a great many drives and blitzes, this is the first time I've earned that extra-blingy Caretaker's Star. Thanks, social distancing! Tdslk (talk) 22:00, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

April blitz planning
Hey there, fellow coordinators! Let's plan a great April blitz collaboration with the folks over at WP:MILHIST. Pinging, who started a conversation with them a couple of months ago. Also see extensive discussion at above. Can we refine that proposed list of articles down to a list of maybe 50 or 60 articles? Does the week of April 13 to 17 12 to 18 look good to everyone? That gives us a week to get ready. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:24, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I think the week sounds good (although should it be the 12th to the 18th?). If we remove the articles in the above list with a red X next to them, It looks like we might have 60–70 to do. We might not be able to get through all of them in a week, but we can give it our best shot and maybe add ce tags to those we don't finish. Tdslk (talk) 21:02, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * FWIW, sounds good to me too. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  23:23, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Mid-month sounds good to me; I'm happy to help check the suitability for c/e of articles in the list if it can be posted a week or so before the drive begins. It will keep my mind off current events, at least! :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  05:25, 5 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm looking forward to this. Sounds like a good plan. Stay safe everyone. Twofingered Typist (talk) 11:44, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Since we're only four days out and promised the milhist folks we'd work on their articles in April, I've created the blitz page and will update the ombox. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  13:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Pinging to let them know that we are planning to proceed with copy editing of Indian MILHIST articles during our April blitz next week. There is a proposed list of about 65 articles on our blitz page. One of our coordinators is giving each one a quick review to ensure that it is still suitable for copy editing. Please let us know if you have any feedback. You are welcome to converse with us here during the blitz if you have questions or notice problems, such as the GOCE being unaware of some MILHIST-specific MOS issues. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:20, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, that reminded me to add links to Manual of Style/Military history. If this blitz is also targeting requests (we have quite a few), that could be made clear. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to have requests targeted; they have built up quite a lot since the lockdowns started. Thanks for posting the MOS link, Reidgreg. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:55, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * This is not a strong opinion, but I would prefer that we focus on the MILHIST articles for this week, since this is a new idea for us. I think it will be useful to see what our capacity is. With the article backlog so low, I expect that Requests will get plenty of attention following the Blitz and in the May drive. That said, if another coordinator adds Requests to the Blitz, I will have zero objections. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:37, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree that our focus should be on the MILHIST articles, although I also don't feel especially strongly about it. Tdslk (talk) 01:18, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up, Jonesey95. Where are you listing the ones you have c/e'd? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:50, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The article list is on the blitz page. We'll be marking each article as we complete it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Fair point Jonesey; most of the articles in the list are in fair shape so a c/e would be appropriate. I've checked most of them now and have removed two so far; the rest I've added maintenance templates where appropriate. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  02:18, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

All articles checked for c/e suitability; some I've passed have refs problems but are otherwise okay. I've marked these sections with Refimprove and its chums. If anyone wants to double-check please go ahead; I've probably missed a few problems but very few are in truly awful condition. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  03:05, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Bafflegab! Let's have a great blitz. I'm looking forward to learning a thing or two about the Indian military. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Baffle; maybe we should remove the articles you've struck through to make the daily record-keeping easier. I agree that since there are plenty of milhist articles, we should focus on them; I'd love it if other WikiProject folks would tap us for help, since the backlog is now low. As Jonesey said, we can always knock down the requests after the blitz; many aren't long, and are fairly easy copyedits. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  13:39, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

April Blitz
Just a heads up that the "Current Blitz" tab does not bring up the newest blitz. Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:28, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reminder, and it's fixed. It's easily editable (meaning I can do it ) at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/tabs. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  13:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Ten years of GOCE drives
Hi all, I just wanted to note that our upcoming May Drive will be ten years since our very first drive! I know we aren't much for tooting our own horns around here, but to me that's something to celebrate! Ten years is a long time for anything to last on Wikipedia, and in my humble opinion the Guild is running now as strong as ever. While I'm not asking for a ticker tape parade, in my mind, it's a least worth, say, a news item in The Signpost and maybe a special banner on our pages. Does anyone else have thoughts about how to mark the occasion? Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 19:40, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for noticing,, and you're right. I've never written anything for the Signpost, though, and don't know how long such a news item should be. We should be able to cobble together a banner. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  02:11, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I left a suggestion on the Signpost page and told them to come here if they have any questions. Tdslk (talk) 23:41, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Hidden copyedit categories
In preparation for the May drive, I'm vetting the current April backlog for unsuitable candidates. Usually, it's an easy job; if there's no copyedit tag at the top of the page, I search for section or inline tags. Sometimes, though (like with Deep Knowledge Ventures, which is at AfD for notability), any references to copyediting are hidden categories; there are no tags that I can see. How should we deal with this? There's no way to get an article off the backlog (again, that I can see) if there is no tag to remove. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  17:10, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Awkward applied the category. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:21, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Jonesey. How about Guvaka, which redirects to Govindaraja I? No reason for the category there, AFAICT.  Mini  apolis  19:09, 20 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Guvaka's history indicates that it had been tagged for copyediting, but I thought the redirect would remove it from the category. We didn't have these problems with the older backlogs .  Mini  apolis  19:17, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * It might have taken the job queue a bit to catch up with the change from a tagged article to an empty redirect. You will sometimes see redirects in categories when someone mistakenly puts redirect code at the top of an article without removing the content, or adds a bunch of content to a redirect without removing the redirect code at the top. That always means a look through the history to see what the page should look like. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:39, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

May Drive
Given the spectacular progress we have made on the article list during the current blitz, helped no doubt by a certain pesky virus, I wonder if anyone else has given any thought to the May Drive? Today there are roughly 260 articles needing copy editing and almost 60 GOCE requests for a total of 320 potential articles. During the last drive, we cleared up 359 articles needing a c/e plus requests. Even if the number of articles requiring a c/e in April doubles to 300, that would leave a rough total of 470 articles for the drive. We had 29 participants in the March drive; given most of us are in self-isolation, we may have a lot more in May.

Do we have enough articles for the coming drive? (A question I never thought I would ask.) Is there another group with a list of articles they would like edited? Are there more Military History articles?

Perhaps I am just being overly optimistic?

Any thoughts?

Stay safe,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:48, 18 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Good question, . I made a few suggestions for where we could find additional articles in early February, but they didn't get much traction then. As I said at the time, our goal shouldn't be to have no articles tagged as needing copy editing, but to have no articles that need copy editing, so I think it makes sense to start seeking out more articles that need work given that the backlog is so low. Tdslk (talk) 00:11, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm up for a themed articles + REQ drive and MILHIST seems to be a productive vein. I'm willing to triage if the article list is added a few days beforehand. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  00:29, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * As this is the 10th anniversary drive and the backlog is low, I think it's important that we do not exclude the backlog but work on finishing it off. What could be more appropriate for an anniversary than that? Expand the scope, sure, if you think there won't be enough to work on, but include the bread and butter. Start with January through March or April backlog along with March and April requests, add May of both if necessary, and if we think they're also needed, include themed articles in the mix. Maybe have separate tables and graphs for the themed articles, because aiming for a zero backlog is a powerful motivator. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:03, 19 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Good idea, . Stay safe everyone and all the best,  Mini  apolis  17:29, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize this was the 10th anniversary drive. I think the backlog will pick up more articles before and through May, so perhaps backlog and requests will be sufficient.


 * I liked Tdslk's earlier suggestions (drawing from Category:Articles needing cleanup and Category:Wikipedia articles with style issues, particularly the MOS sub-categories). I'd like to make another suggestion in that vein (for a later drive or blitz).  Copy editing long plot summaries:  There are over 4,000 articles tagged with  (the majority of articles from Category:Wikipedia articles with plot summary needing attention), and I feel that this is in the realm of copy editing: trimming excessive details, writing concisely, and dealing with tone issues.  Copy editors would have to be familiar with Writing about fiction and some of the specific size guidelines.  There are a lot of forms and genres that it seems like there should be something interesting for everyone. (I've done this for TV shows, movies, novels, graphic novels and video games.) – Reidgreg (talk) 11:43, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd actually rather not have topic-themed drives, if only because I'm not that interested in military history, so a month of that would not be appealing. And if we chose a topic I'd like, others might not be interested. Tangentially, I think that's a good reason to add articles from the lists I suggested to the backlog: some editors might prefer to copy edit in areas where they have interest or expertise, whether its military history, animals, South America, or whatever. With more articles in the list, there is more potential for people to find articles for copy editing on their preferred subject. Plot summaries might work as an area we could tackle, but I get nervous making decisions about what to include and what to delete when I'm not familiar with the film, etc., as is usually the case. Tdslk (talk) 18:30, 19 April 2020 (UTC)


 * not a coordinator, but FWIW I agree with, I think we should focus on clearing out the whole backlog and see where we are then. Especially seeing as this is the 10-year mark, it would be a really great motivator IMHO. Anyways, just my two cents. CHeers, -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 01:53, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * (For the record, everyone is always welcome to comment here, coordinator or not. ) I'm torn. I agree that it would be exciting to see the number go to zero, since that's what we've been working on for a blinking decade. Personally, I've participated in over 50 drives now towards that goal, and I tend to work more on shorter articles because I like to see a big daily number next to a green down triangle in the table. I think that my emphasizing that a zero backlog doesn't mean our work is over is as much for my own benefit as anything. Still, maybe it is worth seeing the number go to zero (if we get there in May), before looking for more work, as a way of acknowledging our achievement. Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 02:41, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with all that's been said and I don't have a strong opinion one way or another. Long plot sections are quite difficult to reduce if one cannot discern major plot points from trivial ones. I also understand MILHIST doesn't have universal appeal; my idea of a poor choice would be sports articles. So I'll go with whatever you choose. I've created the drive page so it's ready whenever you are. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  04:25, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps the "compromise" is to see how things go during the drive and then add Category:Articles needing cleanup and Category:Wikipedia articles with style issues if necessary. Although I have edited long plot summaries I have only done so if I am familiar with the subject or can find a decent summary online that can guide me. If not, I simply let the person requesting the c/e know that I can't help them. Frankly, I don't think that's a category that is going to attract very many contributors. Twofingered Typist (talk)
 * I think that's a good plan. Especially with the Requests page having exploded this month, we'll have plenty to do. Tdslk (talk) 16:41, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with what appears to be the consensus: Let's focus on the backlog and get it down to one month, and also work on Requests. If we get to May 20 we are out of articles, let's meet back here and figure it out. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:49, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed, let's see if we can knock the backlog to double- or single-digits, and take care of the requests that built up. I put in Jan-Mar as the old months, though that's just over 100 articles so we should blow through them before mid-May.  Should we have a special 10th anniversary note on the drive page and perhaps the ombox? – Reidgreg (talk) 21:03, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think "Articles needing cleanup" is a good match for the GOCE's copy-editing remit; they usually have more problems than a c/e can fix. Copy-editing doesn't mean finding references, dealing with POVs, poor referencing, spam, poor translations etc.; that's what WP:CLEANUP is for. If you find any articles that only need a c/e, feel free to swap the templates. "Articles with style issues" might be a more suitable source but I've never been there. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  21:47, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , I agree that many articles tagged for cleanup would not be appropriate for copy editing, nor, for that matter, are many of the "articles with style issues." In my original post in February, I suggested looking through the cleanup articles to find ones that needed copy editing. Sometimes this is stated explicitly in the "reason" field of the template, other times a quick glance through the article would make it clear. Frankly, I think a lot of editors use the cleanup tag when they mean that the article needs copy editing. I'm willing to volunteer to sort through the cleanup articles if we decide it would make sense for our project if (still using if) the backlog does approach empty. Regards, Tdslk (talk) 01:08, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

A few thoughts as we prepare for the May Drive: Just my thoughts! I hope everyone is safe and well! Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 03:08, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * With the Signpost article we might attract a few more new participants than usual. I've signed up to be a reviewer, but it might be best if we had multiple experienced editors to provide timely feedback.
 * I'd love if there was some logo or other splash of color to celebrate our ten years, beyond just plain text in the Ombox. I don't have any particular design skills, but I would be very appreciative of anyone who could make one!
 * We don't know whether we will hit zero articles in the backlog. The Signpost article might also drive people to tag more articles, and the Requests page has exploded this month. Still, there's a good chance we will make it. I'm excited about some of the ideas above about where to find additional articles we can edit, but at the same time I'm feeling more in favor of having that symbolic accomplishment of cleaning out the backlog, and I would support reaching that goal before we start adding articles back in from other sources.
 * Right now the drive page has all articles (January through April) as "old" for purposes of bonus points. I wonder if we should start with just January through March, and then add in April if and when we clear out the earlier months.
 * I added an ombox to the top of the drive page. I also blinged out the regular Ombox with our prettiest, most coveted barnstar. I am not the best with aesthetics, so if someone wants to make them look prettier, be my guest!
 * I added April to the "old" months, because the first three months add up to only 110 articles. We will blow through those for sure. We cleared 140 old articles in January and 216 old articles in March. My prediction is that we will get through all 282 articles in the current backlog and end up with only articles from May 2020. We veteran editors and those of us who are linear thinkers can ensure that the oldest months get cleared.
 * I don't think we have ever discussed what a "backlog" means in the GOCE. I don't think it means getting to zero articles in the copy editing category. Most categories or queues have a threshold above which that category or queue is considered to have a backlog. I propose that the threshold for the GOCE might be one month of articles (the same might go for Requests); beyond that, we officially have a backlog. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think we have ever discussed what a "backlog" means in the GOCE. I don't think it means getting to zero articles in the copy editing category. Most categories or queues have a threshold above which that category or queue is considered to have a backlog. I propose that the threshold for the GOCE might be one month of articles (the same might go for Requests); beyond that, we officially have a backlog. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think we have ever discussed what a "backlog" means in the GOCE. I don't think it means getting to zero articles in the copy editing category. Most categories or queues have a threshold above which that category or queue is considered to have a backlog. I propose that the threshold for the GOCE might be one month of articles (the same might go for Requests); beyond that, we officially have a backlog. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

May Community View
Hi all! In my capacity as Signpost writer, I'm putting together a Community View piece for the 10 year anniversary. It will contain a couple (3, 4, maybe 5) sections of prose about the achievement, (i.e. How we got here, what's next, etc.) If any of you have an idea for a section, please don't hesitate to write it up or suggest it! I'm putting together a rough draft at User:Puddleglum2.0/May CV if any of you want to help out. If your interested, it would be great to get the view of a non-coord/relatively new member! Please don't hesitate to ask questions, here or on my talk page. for examples of a community view piece, you could look at some previous issues. I think the current issue also has one. Thanks, -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 19:13, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Some of my favorite Signpost pieces about WikiProjects have been interview-style pieces, where a writer poses some questions to three or four project participants, whose answers are presented in whole or in part. I guess that's more of a "WikiProject Report" piece than a Community View piece. I guess it depends on whether how much writing and editing you (Puddleglum2.0) would like to do versus how much you want the piece to be in editors' own words. Either way, I'll be happy to participate; I've been active with the project for seven years, which is not as long as some of us. I recommend looking at our annual reports, like WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Membership/News/2019 Annual Report for ideas about how we got here, both from a "counting" perspective and from a "how we behaved and how we managed it" perspective. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:46, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Forgot to ask: do you have a deadline? – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:47, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I also like the interview style, but whatever works best for the Signpost is fine by me. Tdslk (talk) 01:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I would love to do an interview as well. Smallbones, our Editor in Chief, suggested a community view, so I can talk with him about perhaps changing that. About the deadline: with a community view I would publish in the May issue; around the 25th or 26th. I could whip up an interview for this issue if allowed (deadline then being in four-five days); I'm a lot more accustomed to that and there seems to be enough interviewees. There would be a lot less copyediting to do, so we would be able to squeak in closer to the deadline than most others probably. : what do you think? -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 01:23, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I supposed I'd prefer a Community view article, but it's up to you. The complication is that we (you) already have an interview with Guy Macon which we can't put off until next month. I've never printed two interviews in one month, but suppose that's not impossible. We would need a new rubric for one of the interviews. Maybe "A special editor" (too sappy). OK, first get the interview - that keeps our options open. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 01:38, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * getting the interview set up -- we can always wait until next month to publish. I also have some ideas for a community view, but I don't know if I could get it done by the deadline. -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 02:59, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , I'd be honoured to participate. I've taken a look at some of the older Community View pieces and have a general idea as to how it's laid out. I looked at Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/WikiProject report; would you like me to answer there or as Bafflegab did over at "May CV"? — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  03:41, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * right now I think we're looking at a WPR . It would be great if you could answer there. I'm sorry for the hassle this is turning into! Can I count on these people to answer?
 * These are editors who have indicated willingness to participate; if you want to, please do! We have an extended deadline, but I'd like to get this in by Wednesday. Putting out the call now for one or two more people to participate. Thanks all. -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 04:55, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , Who do you want to hear from? There are lots of Guild members who I'm sure could provide insightful answers to your questions. In addition to the above, there are three more current coordinators:, , and , all of whom are long-time participants. In addition, has been a coordinator, lead coordinator and now emeritus coordinator since January 2013. Then there's , who is, I believe, the only still active member of the Guild who participated in the very first drive (and quite possibly every single drive), and hands down has contributed more towards reducing the backlog than any other editor. And there are a number of other editors who have been steadily pitching in around the Guild for years, and who would no doubt have thoughtful responses. I am happy to participate, but if you can't fit us all in I'd be willing to demure to make space for others. Regards, Tdslk (talk) 05:33, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I've already responded at Puddleglum's interview page, which I think would be the best place to collect other responses, unless others wish to respond elsewhere or off-wiki. I'll collect some more specific REQ stats in a bit. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  06:29, 21 April 2020 (UTC
 * Five is not a hard limit of participants; if you would like to answer, feel more than welcome to. anyone who wants to answer may. I apologize the interview page actually changed; it's now at WP:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/WikiProject report, with more questions. I apologize for the inconvenience and confusion. If you have more questions please don't hesitate to ask! -- Puddleglum  2.0 (How's my driving?) 14:14, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem Puddleglum; I've copied my responses over to the new page. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  03:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * If we have a larger number of participants, we could divvy up the questions so that we don't all have to answer each one. For some questions we might all say the same thing, which would get repetitive, while for others some people might not have an answer. For instance, I don't have much to say about comparing the GOCE to other Wikiprojects, since this is the only Wikiproject where I am especially active. Regards, Tdslk (talk) 16:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, that would work -- you don't have to answer every question if you don't have an answer, usually every question gets at least one answer, and if not, I'll replace it. Thanks, -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 16:48, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem Puddleglum; I've copied my responses over to the new page. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  03:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * If we have a larger number of participants, we could divvy up the questions so that we don't all have to answer each one. For some questions we might all say the same thing, which would get repetitive, while for others some people might not have an answer. For instance, I don't have much to say about comparing the GOCE to other Wikiprojects, since this is the only Wikiproject where I am especially active. Regards, Tdslk (talk) 16:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, that would work -- you don't have to answer every question if you don't have an answer, usually every question gets at least one answer, and if not, I'll replace it. Thanks, -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 16:48, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

questions set up: see WP:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/WikiProject report. -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 02:59, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, please submit by noonish (NY Time) on Saturday the 25th. Deadline could be a big traffic jam this month, so I hesitate to go longer.  Smallbones( smalltalk ) 03:26, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't want this to be a burden: is it easier to do it next month? I'm completely open to whatever option makes your job easiest. -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 04:49, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not a burden. If you get the interview done and it's in good shape in time, we'll publish it this month.  If not, we can publish it next month, *or* you can use much of it for a Community view article.  Smallbones( smalltalk ) 12:16, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping, ; you'll be a fine representative of the old guard. So would, although she focuses now on copyvio work. If you need me, I watch this page. Thanks, stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  14:43, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I threw in as well, just to get the ball rolling. Feel free to copy edit, delete, etc.   Would you be able to update File:Copyeditors progress.png in case they want to run an image with the article? – Reidgreg (talk) 18:25, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Update: article is now submitted! Thanks to everyone who helped, we managed to get it in a day before the writing deadline! All the best, -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 02:27, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I took the liberty of copy editing the whole page. It looks great! Thanks to all who contributed, and thanks to for wrangling us. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:38, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

May ombox
and, beautiful job! Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  17:32, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Newer editors on the Requests page
Hi, Two of our newer Guild members, and, have been active on the Requests page this month. Based on my reviews of their work, I don't think that they yet have the experience and knowledge of the MOS to meet the expectations that requesters often have of us. I would recommend that they focus on backlog articles for now, where they can hone their copy editing on less high-profile articles. If not, perhaps they could be asked to wait for the review of a Requests page article to be finished before they start on another. They both are quite prolific, and and I are struggling to keep up with all of the review work.

In general, I know we've had conversations in the past about how to handle newer editors working on Requests articles, but I don't think we've ever had an official policy beyond making sure that their work gets reviewed. I would support a rule that new Guild members wanting to work on the Requests page must wait for an article to be reviewed before they can start on their next one. This might seem counterproductive given that the Requests page has ballooned in the past month, but a reduced reviewer workload would allow TFT and I to also edit some articles. Regards, Tdslk (talk) 02:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)


 * No worries, I will leave this portion of Wikipedia as it seems I am not welcome, and not one person has mentioned anything to me about any errors, so this is one way to make someone feel unwelcome. Good luck. GalendaliaChat Me Up 03:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * All editors, including you, are welcome to participate in the GOCE's drives, and you have indeed received feedback about your copy edits on your talk page. As we indicate on our drive page, editors should be familiar with Wikipedia's Manual of Style; skilled use of English is especially important for articles listed on the Requests page; and all copy edits from the Requests page should be reviewed, time permitting. We appreciate enthusiasm, and we also have a desire to provide high-quality copy edits to people who take the time to make requests of us. If you receive a review of your copy edits, that is normal for new, enthusiastic copy editors, and you should not take feedback personally. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:27, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The feedback I got was minor, you issued a notice because I forgot to sign a message in a conversation I was involved in; I was asked to fixed something to British English (that is not American English) but I do have a pretty good understanding of it (and I since fixed it, minus one error of the word 'storey'; one edit had to do with foreign currency. There was no other feedback and considering I am a college graduate who has minored in English (and did all honors classes during my course) with English as my primary language, then yes I am taking this personal; so my decision stands. I am no longer participating in this guild. Please no longer ping me in this discussion or mark me in any way that I receive an alert. I am choosing to no longer participate. GalendaliaChat Me Up 03:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Galendalia: Congratulations on completing your undergraduate degree; I know that takes hard work and dedication. I respect your decision to withdraw from participation in the guild, and I hope that you find work here on Wikipedia that is a good fit for your skills.
 * I have reviewed all of Galendalia's copy edits (no ping, at that editor's request) that are still on the Requests page. They all need more work, which I have noted there. Something may have to be done to the entries on that page to prevent them from being archived by the bot.
 * Of Galendalia's requests that have already been archived, it looks like and  reviewed and provided further copy edits to all of them except Paul J. Tesar, which was cleaned up and had the copy edit tag reapplied by . I have finished the copy edit on Paul J. Tesar.
 * As for, I see activity on the following requests: Qibla, cleaned up by Twofingered Typist, and John Cena, which is marked as "working". Initial edits on John Cena were of poor quality; a subsequent edit was better, but introduced some errors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * and, i understand that but the thing is, almost all other people have been fairly active. Even Tdslk. Even so i am an 8th Grader which means i have to study and have online classes 12-3PM. I tried my best even though the results were not productive. I understand that copy editing requires high quality but i wish some reviewers welcomed the newcomers and didn't directly criticize their work and were friendly.
 * Rahbab Chowdhury (talk) 08:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It says right on the drive page that copy editors' work is subject to review (as is every edit here at Wikipedia). Being direct in our feedback is better than being vague and unclear. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It is possible if you want, to be friendly and clear at the same time or you can simply ignore us. Thank you. MRC2RULES (talk) 14:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Rahbab Chowdhury (talk) 08:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It says right on the drive page that copy editors' work is subject to review (as is every edit here at Wikipedia). Being direct in our feedback is better than being vague and unclear. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It is possible if you want, to be friendly and clear at the same time or you can simply ignore us. Thank you. MRC2RULES (talk) 14:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

FWIW,, I enjoy backlog work because it's less deadline-driven; it was how I learned what I know about copyediting. We're sorry if you and are offended, but our first obligation is to our requesters. WP is an encyclopedia, not social media or an online game. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  13:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I again want to clarify that neither me nor anyone consider this as a competition or a social media. I would more like think it as "competition from within". Sorry, but newcomers do make mistakes. I will try being a better copy-editor :)  MRC2RULES (talk) 14:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

We all make mistakes, not just newcomers. The important thing is to learn from them, and part of that learning process is the ability to accept constructive criticism. All the best,  Mini  apolis  19:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I have come back to make a comment. I see where the feedback was posted (on the edits, reversions, etc.,) of the respective articles. To me, this is in no way beneficial to me as an editor because I do not leave the article or article talk page on my watch list or it would build to a list that is infinite. PuddleGlum2.0 left advice and pointed out my errors on my talk page about an issue she saw and she said it respectfully without attacking me. I have zero issues with someone being civil, however, I do not tolerate personal attacks, even subtle personal attacks, as Wikipedia has a policy against it and I do not allow it in my personal life either. I have no problem admitting I made mistakes on these pages, however, some of them are attacks on me and my character. I saw one reverted edit stating I cannot change a source or title of it. I did do that as the editor who pulled that information has access to something no one else has (which may be possible COI) as it is backend access to the nomination awards and not viewable to the public. For example, our Grammy awards, you have to be a certain type of individual to get access to the backend (i.e. actor, producer, etc.) so I changed the citation to a public list of the nominees which was recently published (whereas the citation previously use was accessed before the nominations were publically released. With that stated, the bare reference fix updates the title automatically to the name of the page as it is listed in the header of the webpage. However, a certain individual reverted that and stated I cannot change the citation which is not correct. I can, as an editor on any page, change any citation to something with more information or is accessible with the exact same information that the editor wrote on the page. I have re-read the Mos and I do see where I made mistakes, however, they were also corrected by someone else. With regards to the statement made above "It is possible if you want, to be friendly and clear at the same time or you can simply ignore us," I agree as Jonesy95 made this a personal attack on both of us. With regards to this statement " The important thing is to learn from them, and part of that learning process is the ability to accept constructive criticism" yes it is true and I do accept it if I am notified properly of it and it is not an attack. As a side note, I just started wearing progressive eyeglasses on Sunday so this is impacting me for the time being.
 * I also recommend that when someone is working on a ce, they should really place the banner at the top of the page and inform the requestor, this should not be suggestive but a required policy, as yesterday a user pinged me wondering why things were popping up with issues on their page, as it turns out, a ce member was working on the page, left the page incomplete, and then worked on it again the next day after I pinged them as I feel this would stop confusion with other editors. Thanks for reading. GalendaliaChat Me Up 19:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You have accused me of making personal attacks, which, if true, would be a violation of Wikipedia policy. Please provide direct quotes of my statements to back up this serious accusation. If you are unable to provide this evidence, please withdraw your accusation. Thank you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:33, 5 May 2020 (UTC)


 * - "skilled use of English is especially important for articles listed on the Requests page;" - That is saying I do not have skilled use of the English language which is insulting based on my minor and the fact English is my dominate language for over 40 years, as well as, my college grades for said courses.
 * - "Galendalia: Congratulations on completing your undergraduate degree; I know that takes hard work and dedication" While subtle and also general knowledge, this is a personal attack as anyone who works on obtaining a higher education degree knows how much work it takes, so I see this as  'so what you got your degree hoopty do ';
 * - "...Being direct in our feedback is better than being vague and unclear." - No one mentioned this, however, there is a way to be direct AND friendly at the same time, as another editor pointed out.
 * - Not really a personal attack, but you stated in part "Of Galendalia's requests that have already been archived, it looks like Tdslk and Twofingered Typist reviewed and provided further copy edits to all of them except Paul J. Tesar, which was cleaned up and had the copy edit tag reapplied by Justlettersandnumbers. I have finished the copy edit on Paul J. Tesar." - Looking at the history of the page you didn't do anything except the following two items:
 * "rm inappropriate category" (-21 characters)
 * "WP:GOCE copy edit" (-110 characters).
 * All of the work was completed by numerous other editors, so you should not be claiming credit for something you did not do, with your statement as "I just finished the copy edit on....", as that is misleading and in fact not true. I do appreciate the edits others made, but now it looks like a lot of edits are happening (and one in particular by stating "rm stuff about a company, source does not even remotely suggest that it was founded by this person (though it will surely attempt to commercialise his discoveries)"; Per http://tesarlab.case.edu/?q=people/paul-tesar and https://www.convelotx.com/about Paul J. Tesar is a co-founder of Convelo Therapeutics, so why that edit was done and the source removed is beyond me.)
 * There was also another edit you reverted of mine with the comment "rv to last good version. Changes to citation titles are not acceptable. Another copy editor will take this request." - Yes, that is also a personal insult because you could have pointed me to where it says I cannot do that and help me in correcting my errors. I have zero issues with constructive criticism, but again, you should try to phrase things a lot better so they cannot be misinterpreted by others. This citation change was also done as stated for the reasons previously listed. Also, web page titles can and do change so when I do the check, I update the name of the page to match what the page title is at the time of my reading and change the access to show I accessed it that day.
 * There was also another edit you reverted of mine with the comment "rv to last good version. Changes to citation titles are not acceptable. Another copy editor will take this request." - Yes, that is also a personal insult because you could have pointed me to where it says I cannot do that and help me in correcting my errors. I have zero issues with constructive criticism, but again, you should try to phrase things a lot better so they cannot be misinterpreted by others. This citation change was also done as stated for the reasons previously listed. Also, web page titles can and do change so when I do the check, I update the name of the page to match what the page title is at the time of my reading and change the access to show I accessed it that day.


 * Some editors have provided great feedback to me and I also find it funny one of the star editors of the GOCE noticed minor issues in the The Sky Is Pink and said I provided great additions to the article and you even chimed in with helpful advice about the currency and how it should be listed and that comment I have no issue with, as it was polite, constructive, and assisted me in understanding crore. So after reviewing all of this, it appears each editor has a different view of what is acceptable and what is not based on the number of revisions and undoes to articles by different members of this guild particularly The Sky Is Pink.


 * In closing, this is not meant to start any debate, discussion, or heated in anyways. This is merely working to resolve the disputes per Dispute resolution. I am merely pointing out what I see to help you understand my point of view. Cordially, GalendaliaChat Me Up 22:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * As Galendalia (no ping, at the editor's request) has aptly demonstrated immediately above, none of the numbered items above could be construed by a reasonable person as personal attacks. They were either friendly comments, direct quotations from the GOCE's own pages as they related to the content of editors' changes to articles, or comments on the content of editors' edits. I urge Galendalia to read WP:AGF and WP:NPA thoroughly, even if they have read those pages in the past. In the interest of putting this discussion behind us, I will not insist on a retraction of the clearly baseless accusation of personal attacks, instead letting the statements above serve as equivalent. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Training new members of the Guild
Thinking about the above and similar issues at the end of the last drive, I wonder if we could do better about guiding new members of the Guild, setting expectations, and providing feedback. Right now the best we've got is the "How to copy edit" tab, which is a bit dusty, and more a set of links than a teaching tool. Maybe something we could think more about once the drive is over. Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 05:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * (non-coordinator comment) While the "How to" tab is great to use as a resource, I don't think it sees much activity from newbies for three reasons:
 * The new copyeditor assumes they know how to copyedit, which may very well be the case, but whose style does not fit as ideally as the Guild would like. I can't recall myself visiting that tab when I joined years ago for that reason.
 * The tab doesn't stick out. It's one of 11 light blue tabs; perhaps giving it another colour will draw eyes to it.
 * The section that addresses new copy editors is very far down in the left panel. Another editor in another discussion in another WikiProject once posted a meta-study (which I unfortunately cannot find at this time) which described how page readership drops past the first third of the page; the new copy editor section is at the 3/4 mark.
 * I think more one-on-one dialogues that link to light and short articles that require copyediting may help. I've also seen some other WikiProjects set up "School" subpages, such as the Counter Vandalism Unit Academy and the New Page Review training program. Maybe that's something we can think about. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  06:41, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * With respect, and, we should avoid instruction creep. Copyediting is tedious, detailed work, and the GOCE has a chronic labor shortage. I for one have limited time to spend on WP, which emphasizes self-teaching. The resources are out there; if copyeditors want to run before they learn to walk, that's a behavioral issue which no amount of time-consuming mentoring will solve. I've seen one-on-one mentoring fail in other areas of the project. Too much oversight can be discouraging, too; if requesters aren't complaining (and I'm interpreting the current requests-page balloon as positive feedbck), then maybe things are okay. All the best,  Mini  apolis  13:41, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * With respect, and, we should avoid instruction creep. Copyediting is tedious, detailed work, and the GOCE has a chronic labor shortage. I for one have limited time to spend on WP, which emphasizes self-teaching. The resources are out there; if copyeditors want to run before they learn to walk, that's a behavioral issue which no amount of time-consuming mentoring will solve. I've seen one-on-one mentoring fail in other areas of the project. Too much oversight can be discouraging, too; if requesters aren't complaining (and I'm interpreting the current requests-page balloon as positive feedbck), then maybe things are okay. All the best,  Mini  apolis  13:41, 5 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I have recently taken to sending out a GOCE welcome template to new members; it contains links to copyediting guides, MoS, and the Simplified MoS. It also advises the editor to start of copyediting articles in the backlog. Currently, it only advises the recevier to read the guide and start off at the backlog; I wonder if I should change that to something like "please read these guides" rather than "it is advised you read these guides." Just a thought. -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 15:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm glad this was raised, although I don't think the recent behaviour of a new member (who, on his talk page claims to be at least 43 years old), is our problem. He got suitable feedback for his work on The Sky Is Pink and other articles from me and others, but rather than take that on-board and learn, he chose instead to quit. Some people aren't good fits for the Guild and it's best for both parties to let them go. Like Miniapolis, I don't think the best-structured help pages in the world would have helped here.


 * I think while the 'how-to' information *is* on our pages, it could be better structured and easier to locate for newer Guild members. If someone would like to rewrite and restructure these pages, please go ahead (but get consensus here!). I might do that task later in the year, if no-one else wants to. I also like Puddleglum's welcome template. There was at one stage a GOCE mentoring section that fell out of use; if we had enough people willing to mentor new copy-editors, maybe it could be brought back. I wouldn't be among that group though, sorry. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  20:02, 5 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I've taken the liberty of switching around some sections; please revert if its out of line. I like the idea of taking new editors on a guide through copyediting; this could be as simple as having them watch your copyedits and explaining to them your process along the way. If we could find the mentoring section, I would be more than happy to do something with it, I've gotten some experience mentoring with the CVUA. All the best, -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 20:21, 5 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Responding to a couple of the above comments, I wasn't envisioning having more instructions, but better instructions, which hopefully would ease the workload for coordinators in the long run. No, it wouldn't resolve every situation, but I think it could help in some. In any event, as I said above, I'd rather wait until June to work on this; I was just throwing the idea out there for now. I hope that everyone is staying safe and healthy! Regards, Tdslk (talk) 04:41, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree that this could be better organized, but haven't managed to get around to it myself (it's been on my talk list for more than a year). We should absolutely have consensus, as we don't want to give contradictory advice. As a simple matter of volunteer time (and dropout), this has to be set up as a help-yourself, DIY sort of thing, and ask coordinators if/when you get stuck. (Plus, of course, feedback on reviews.) – Reidgreg (talk) 12:03, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification,, and I agree. There's a fair amount of overlap and what-not in the how-to stuff, but I don't feel up to overhauling it at the moment. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  15:42, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, the how-to page should have been more detailed. Or it can show a more step by step detailed process how to copy edit. Yes it does need to stand out. I also admit, I didn't notice it at first, and when I did read it, the information wasn't enough so I kept on making mistakes. MRC2RULES (talk) 20:31, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I think part of the problem with the how-to page is that if we simplify it, people want more detail and if we add more detail, people want it to be made simpler. Because no two articles are the same, we can only give general tips and hope copy-editors will approach their task with a flexible mindset; what's suitable for one article may be completely inappropriate for another. That's one of the reasons we suggest less-experienced copy-editors should gain experience with backlog articles before taking on requests, especially those articles that are being prepared for GA, A-Class and FA nominations. I agree with Miniapolis that we should avoid instruction creep but I think we ought to give clear and useful information without being condescending; finding the balance is difficult. MRC2RULES, I'm glad you're persevering and I hope your experience will be smoother from now on; we all make mistakes, the important thing is to learn from them. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  02:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 *  Baffle☿gab  Yes, but imo I think it can be detailed. It is already very simple or I would say "stub". Or, we can keep it and show a link to an advanced how-to and it will be great if there were a Q&A like those in Teahouse. Higher experienced copyeditors like you or  or coordinators who can reply to the threads. Currently all questions are being asked on the guild's talk page which I think is not its purpose. Important discussions can be held there.MRC2RULES (talk) 20:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think the GOCE needs a Teahouse-style venue; imo, it would become a drain on our already-thin resources. I'd sooner be copy-editing than answering questions to which a newbie could easily find the answers, which probably acts as a useful filter. The Guild's talk pages (including this one) are for interacting with the Guild's coordinators and others about GOCE processes and issues. By the way, please don't copy my sig when you want to ping me; it looks odd and could confuse some readers. Also, I have turned off pings so I don't see a notification when you ping me—this last point is noted on my talk page. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  06:48, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The main how-to page should IMHO be a directory to guidelines, essays, and tutorials, with only the most general of advice. It should serve to quickly direct editors to resources, many of which are not maintained by the Guild.  Detailed instructions go on sub-pages.  I feel that this follows basic summary style and layout.  Editors will be coming to the how-to page for different kinds of help, and hitting them with detailed instructions on one aspect of copy-editing could hinder their search for the information they actually want. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:50, 9 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Fwiw, I agree with . If all else fails, and an editor cannot resolve their question, I am sure any of the coordinators would be happy to try to answer it. Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:19, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Requests being completed for the GOCE drive?
Could someone check 's edits? They're marking a lot of requests as completed in their article list yet I can't seem to find those articles corresponding anywhere on the Requests page, nor do they appear to have ever edited the Requests page. These might be from the May 2020 copyedit maintenance category? — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  22:34, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Tenryuu, I'll have a look in a bit. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:58, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I see some old articles (marked *O), but nothing marked *R.  Mini  apolis  23:22, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * And (being slow on the uptake) I now see the issue and have pinged them. They may be choosing articles at random, not understanding the scope of the drive. All the best,  Mini  apolis  23:29, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks both; I've removed the '*R' tags because the articles have never been at REQ; yes it's probably a misunderstanding. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:50, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Miniapolis, I'm partly to blame here; I removed the *R tags and did not re-tag immediately because I wanted to check them out; I've now done so and I've replaced the correct tags to his/her entries. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  00:14, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks to the both of you! — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  00:11, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

The rise of Wikipedia as a source of medical information
Interesting. Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:29, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , Huh, wonder if WP:COVID-19 has seen this. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  14:47, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-rise-of-wikipedia-as-a-source-of-medical-information/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab6i&linkId=89329921&fbclid=IwAR1BtaCpos1PKiZ41hOvPkKy82pWnbEPD119-C3K7R73bVBc2MeAnE-WnhA

Thanks, good idea. I have posted it on their Talk page. Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:12, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

May someone review my copy-edits, please.
I am a new Wikipedian, and I have just joined GOCE. I have done 3 copy-edits, and I don't know if they are meet the standards of GOCE. I have copy-edited two requests, and one article from the backlog. Cheers, Just gonna edit a bit (talk) 01:22, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your work and welcome to the Guild. :) I'll have a look at your edits on the Drive page a bit later today (Sunday). Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  01:37, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've checked them.
 * Yingkiong (backlog); your work here is good and you've made the article more readable, but you missed a few errors ("oranges and pineapple" (mismatch), "writer and author" (same thing).
 * George F. Lewis (GAN); your work here is also good, rephrasing some awkward text and improving the flow. Bearing in mind the purpose of the c/e, I think you might have improved the flow a little more; some of the shorter sentences could have been blended together to avoid repetition of "He...", etc.
 * William Rath (GAN); I also didn't have any major problems with your work on this one but I also think further improvements for flow could have been made.
 * You've made a good start and I'm pleased to see you've improved those articles. I'm being more picky with the latter two because we tend to hold copy-edits for Good Article Nomination (GAN), A-Class nomination and Featured Article Candidate (FAC) requests to a higher standard than those from the backlog. The requesters wish to take them through those review processes so the text needs to be in good condition for the review. Having said that, we work with what we're given, which isn't always up to those standards. I hope you'll stay and do some more copy-editing; you can always ask for feedback here. Thanks again and cheers,  Baffle☿gab  06:03, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Identifying more articles: Dale-Chall readability
Greetings! I'm a big fan of the Guild and have been quite impressed by its achievements in backlog reduction and article improvement. I recently quit my job and so have had a lot of time to work on the moss project, which is listed under the Typo Team because it's focused mainly on fixing individual spelling and style problems rather than whole-article copy editing. In order to produce the typo lists for moss, I run a bunch of Python code on Wikipedia database dumps. Occasionally we run into articles that need whole-article or whole-section copy editing, and I have an algorithm that identifies articles in the moss work queue that are probably more appropriate for the Guild. I'll have a report from that soon, but in the meantime, I've noticed the Guild backlog is happily approaching zero. In the past week or two I've started using the moss infrastructure to play around with ways to identify articles in need of copy editing in completely new ways.

My long-term goal is to run articles through a grammar checker, and I've started building my own. But that won't be ready any time soon, and is also so far proving very computationally intensive. I went looking around for faster methods, and ended up on the article Readability. Basically, the goal is to identify overly dense prose. Humans are pretty good at doing this, but the computer algorithms for doing it so far only use a small fraction of the relevant metrics - the ones that are easy for computers to score, mainly sentence length and word length. According to the article, the metric that correlates best with actual human comprehension is the Dale–Chall readability formula. After excluding a lot of non-prose content (like lists and poems and short image captions), I was able to run this algorithm on the entire English Wikipedia in about 10.5 hours. I have included the 200 worst-scoring articles from the 2020-05-01 dump in the collapsed box below.

Looking through the results, it seems like this algorithm has caught a lot of lists that are in paragraph form that are very long and would be better presented in bullet list form or perhaps in some cases chopped as excessive detail. There's at least one article with poor grammar that has very long sentences which is definitely worth attention from a Guild copy editor. Theoretically, any article with a reading level higher than a 2-year U.S. associates' degree (somewhere around 10.0 on the Dale-Chall scale) is going to be at least somewhat difficult for more than half of the U.S. population to understand, based on educational attainment in the United States and assuming that everyone is reading at grade level. I looked at a few articles around 10 or 12 on the Dale-Chall scale, and though there were long sentences nothing jumped out from a quick skim as sounding overly dense. But these are below my personal reading level, and according to the article on readability writing for a lower reading level is difficult and may require special training. Or maybe this algorithm just isn't doing a good job finding actionable problems.

So, I'm not sure trying to fix all the articles rated 10 or higher on this scale (of which there are about 14,000) is feasible, even though the article on readability claims that studies show this massively increases readership. But the articles scoring off-the-charts bad do seem worth fixing, and I was wondering if the Guild wanted to use this list for a blitz or drive or general work queue or something. If so, the 2020-05-20 dump is nearly ready, and I can produce an updated list off that (and of any length that you want). I can also run the same report again in the future, though it may be worthwhile to keep a list of articles that were looked at and declared OK with no or minimal changes, so the same articles don't get looked at over and over again. -- Beland (talk) 19:47, 22 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Interesting. From a quick glance at some of these articles, it looks like the algorithm gives a high score to articles that contain very long lists of comma-separated or semicolon-separated words or phrases. It also doesn't like articles with lots of non-English text. Fixing those is not really a copy editing task, but the articles might be worth tagging with an appropriate cleanup tag. I only looked at about ten articles; other editors may find articles worth tagging for copy editing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:54, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I had a similar impression. I'm sure there are articles on the list that could use copy editing, but that's mostly not what is putting them at the top of the list. Tdslk (talk) 22:13, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with Jonesey and Tdslk above; some of these articles may be suitable for copy-edit but most of them seem to contain laundry lists of people, places and things. The script might usefully identify articles that have problems but I doubt copy-editing is the correct remedy for most of them; Cleanup, Unreferenced and associated templates would be more suitable templates to add. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:48, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Okey, thanks for taking a look, everyone! I'll tag these for cleanup or whatever they need. -- Beland (talk) 19:30, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Next blitz?
I’m not sure if i’m allowed to post here or not; if not that’s OK. I was just wondering, did you guys have any plans for next blitz? Stay safe and well, -- Total Eclipse 2017  (My profile &#124; My contribs &#124; speak to me) 21:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * All are welcome to post here, if it's a coordination-related message.


 * We usually plan the blitz after the drive is over. Based on the size of the Requests queue, I'm guessing that a Requests blitz will be desired. Let us know if you have more ideas. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:14, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I’m not sure I would want to participate in such a blitz; I would want to, but I honestly don’t trust myself with someone’s request, because what if I mess it up or something? Only problem is, I don’t have any better ideas... Stay safe and well, -- Total Eclipse 2017  (My profile &#124; My contribs &#124; speak to me) 22:21, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , not all requests are equal (apart from being requests ; you might want to hold off on GAN or FAC requests for now, but many other requests are neither. Requesters generally appreciate whatever we do. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  00:04, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * One of the problems of running a low backlog is that we don't have much of a pool of articles from which to choose a theme. Apart from Requests, I'm all out of ideas too. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Another problem with a low backlog is that many articles are still basically under construction and not stable enough to copyedit. All the best,  Mini  apolis  00:06, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm good for a requests blitz. I'd prefer 14–20 June so it coincides (roughly) with the opening of voting for the coord election.   with requests, you also have the requesting editor available to collaborate with. If you don't feel comfortable making some direct edits, note your concern and suggest the change. Once the requester undertands the issue, they may have a better idea. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:28, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

A 14–20 June requests blitz works for me too. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  15:30, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I guess requests would work. Tenryuu taught me a bit about how to handle those... I may not be able to participate anyway, due to a sketchy device and, well, stuff reopening. I’ll try my hardest to make the next few drives though... gotta keep dem rollover words! :D On a serious note, I will try to make the blitz. Still thinking about other ideas though... will post here if I come up with one. Stay safe and well, -- Total Eclipse 2017  (My profile &#124; My contribs &#124; speak to me) 19:12, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, I’m a little confused, as according to the thread not far above this one, newer editors doing requests didn’t seem to go so well? Stay safe and well, -- Total Eclipse 2017  (My profile &#124; My contribs &#124; speak to me) 19:14, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I think I suggested in that thread that newer editors do one article at a time, and then wait for feedback from a reviewer, which still seems like a good idea to me. The coordinators could also select some shorter, easier articles for newer editors to pick among. Tdslk (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I’d be fine with that:) Stay safe and well, -- Total Eclipse 2017  (My profile &#124; My contribs &#124; speak to me) 20:20, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Checking back in regarding the blitz since drive is almost over
Has anyone come up with any more ideas, or is the blitz still planned to be requests? Stay safe and well, -- Total Eclipse 2017  (My profile &#124; My contribs &#124; speak to me) 18:23, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I think it'll just be requests and backlog; I'm not sure we have enough backlog for a themed Blitz, though we can probably always rely on having a surfeit of Indian subcontinent articles! :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  20:05, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Identifying more articles: By number and classification of typos
As mentioned above, here's my second idea for automating identification of articles to copyedit. Part of the moss project code looks at the articles with the most suspected typos, and based on how those typos are classified (misspelling, whitespace error, non-English word) adds them to a list of articles it thinks need a full-article or full-section copyedit. I've included a list of the first 50 articles below produced from the 2020-05-20 database dump.

Same question as last time - is a list like this useful for the Guild coordinators? I expect it requires glancing at each article to see if it's actually ripe for copyediting, though from what I understand coordinators are already doing that in some cases. I can tweak the algorithm to narrow the scope of articles included, if that would be an improvement. For example, there's one article with a bunch of dubious HTML tags, which might just need to be tagged cleanup HTML. There are also several articles which mostly just use the second person too much and could be tagged you instead of copyedit. Articles stop showing up on this list once an editor puts a cleanup tag on them, or if all the typos with a "." in them are fixed (which is helpful for e.g. articles with a lot of science words that are not actually typos and don't need a cleanup tag). -- Beland (talk) 20:49, 27 May 2020 (UTC)


 * I like this list a LOT more than the previous one. It appears to contain a few rough categories of articles: articles that use you/your/contractions; articles with missing spaces after punctuation or spaces before punctuation; articles with scientific names or notation; other stuff. What big groups am I missing? The first two groups of articles should probably be tagged for copy editing, ideally with some indication as to the reason (perhaps just the list of potential typos in an HTML comment). The latter two groups need to be filtered manually by the MOSS team, I think. What do others think? – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree with Jonesey that this list is more in line with what we do. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  22:14, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you Beland; this is a more useful filter for the GOCE than the detection of laundry lists, though the two articles I checked have referencing problems (and I reverted some recent spam). Sort before tagging should be applicable here, I think. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, all the links are instances of those strings in the article? What's with them linking to Wiktionary? — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  22:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That's right, though I suppose it's worth noting that it's strings as they appear after transforming wikitext into plain English text that's fed into the spell checker, so quotations and footnotes and templates are all removed. (This helps spot e.g. missing space after a period, even if there's a ref tag between the period and the next sentence. But it can make the spot a little tricky to find.) The links to Wiktionary are to make it easy to add the word to Wiktionary if it's actually a real word (which happens more often when correcting one-off spelling errors). I can suppress that if it's just cluttering up this list; let me know.
 * I can automate removal of HTML tags and probably the chemistry notation. The whole list down to 7 typos per article is currently about 800 articles; below that and the algorithm seems less accurate. It'll probably get smaller after the first full pass. Dumps are snapshotted on the 1st and 20th of every month, and take a while to process, so results are generally available around the 16th and 24th of every month, plus or minus a few days. If Guild coordinators want to go through the lists and tag articles as they see fit, I'm wondering if that would happen every dump or every month or every two months? -- Beland (talk) 23:17, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , if you could pipe trick them so that the prefixes don't appear that'd be great. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  00:21, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * A question for : If we tag an article with a copy edit tag, will it disappear from your list? In my ideal world, that's what would happen, since that would be our way of saying "The GOCE will take care of this one, so the MOSS team can ignore it." If that is the case, I think we could handle a report of 50 or so articles whenever there is a dump analysis available.
 * What is your count of articles with 10 or more errors? I'm guessing 300 to 400? In my wild imaginings, I could see us working through a list of 300 or so articles and tagging the ones for which copy editing is appropriate, but I would want more opinions before committing the GOCE to that. We coordinators have been saying that with the backlog eliminated, we should think about where to focus. Articles with lots of opportunity for improvement like these could be one thing we take on. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Currently there are 271 on this report with 10 or more suspected typos. Yes, adding tags like copyedit, cleanup, tone, or you will cause an article to be suppressed from the next list, on the theory it's already in a cleanup work queue. -- Beland (talk) 16:13, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Currently there are 271 on this report with 10 or more suspected typos. Yes, adding tags like copyedit, cleanup, tone, or you will cause an article to be suppressed from the next list, on the theory it's already in a cleanup work queue. -- Beland (talk) 16:13, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Take 2
Here's an updated version without the Wiktionary links, and with an improved algorithm that drops HTML tags and chemical formulas. -- Beland (talk) 02:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


 * After a quick glance at this list, I would guess that about 30–35 of these articles would benefit from copy edit tags., if we took on this list, how would you like us to indicate "The typo team should look at this one"? I'm looking at Ophiocordyceps unilateralis as an example of that case. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:21, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Whatever's most convenient for you! The way multiple editors coordinate working on moss lists is that once someone has fixed or tagged an article, they delete it from the list. If it's not something they know how to or happen to want to resolve themselves they either put a note underneath or move it to a holding area. Then after the list has been completely looked at I go through the leftovers in the holding area and read all the notes and figure out how to resolve the remainder or if code changes are needed to keep them from showing up on the next refresh.
 * For Ophiocordyceps unilateralis specifically, the trick I usually use to deal with cases like this is to fix the typos that involve a period. For this article, "competition.When" is the only such typo, so if a coordinator wanted to sent this back to the moss team, they have at least two options. 1.) Leave it in a holding area or add a note as described above. 2.) Add the missing space before "When" and delete the article from the copyedit list; this article would not show up on future reports. The remaining suspected typos for this article would still show up on the moss main listings, and also on my "articles with the most typos" moss report and either way I would notice these are species names and file a request for WikiSpecies to add them. -- Beland (talk) 04:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

May barnstars
Is anyone running the word count script? If not, I can do it. Regards, Tdslk (talk) 03:53, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Please do! – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:24, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * And done and handed out (except mine). Tdslk (talk) 05:56, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Sent yours. – Reidgreg (talk) 14:02, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

June Newsletter
Hi all; I've updated the June newsletter with the May Drive stats (51 participants -- wow!) and the June Blitz is set as 14-20 June, and May backlog and Requests as themes; please feel free to make corrections and adjustments. Many thanks to Reidgreg for creating the page and doing most of the donkey work. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  04:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I've done a few tweaks to the formatting ('section' titles, wikilink bolding, etc) and I'm happy for this nl to go out. Please feel free to make final corrections and tweaks formatting, etc. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  09:41, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I like the headings since this one is longer than normal. – Reidgreg (talk) 14:05, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I put a little bit more polish on it. I think it's ready to go. I can deliver it if there are no further tweaks needed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I checked your changes and have sent it. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:47, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks all. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  03:47, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Ombox
hey all, I was wondering if the Ombox should be updated to reflect the upcoming drive in less than a week. I just remembered to sign up - usually I feel there's a notice at the beginning of the month. I wasn't too sure and didn't feel too bold, so coming here for feedback. All the best, -- puddleglum  2.0  00:28, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Updated, and thanks for the poke.  Mini  apolis  02:20, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , thank you! -- puddleglum  2.0  04:43, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I've removed the May Drive text and tidied the box a little; please revert if my change is inappropriate. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  05:33, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

2020-06-01 database report is ready
As proposed in one of the above threads, I've just posted the results from the 2020-06-01 database dump at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Database Report. I included some suggestions on how to deal with articles on the list, but of course feel free to edit them to suit your workflow. The point of the report is to help the coordinators identify articles for copy editing, so let me know if there's anything I can do to be more helpful in that regard. -- Beland (talk) 20:01, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. Take a look at the problem entries. I estimate that I tagged or fixed 35+ of the 50 articles, so the false positive rate was pretty good. The only thing I noticed was that some of the problems had already been fixed, as long ago as 3 June 2020, so if there is anything you can do to avoid those showing up on the list, that would be helpful. I understand that the dump takes a while to be generated, so if that delay is unavoidable, so be it. Maybe you could ask the typo team to focus on articles other than the ones that show up in this report. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:30, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

June drive
The June drive will be starting shortly. I notice that we have a greater than usual number of people signed up so far, including several new editors. I signed up to be a reviewer, but it would be helpful if we had more than one. Regards, Tdslk (talk)
 * I'd be interested in helping out as a reviewer. Is there a page that I can consult for what reviewers do? I am somewhat familiar with reviewers checking an editor's articles roughly after every ten, but I suspect this changes when it's a blitz. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  20:23, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks to and  for signing up, and thank you  for offering to help. I don't know that we have much of anything written down about how to review work during drives and blitzes. I'm pretty sure I've seen the "review 1 in 10" advice you reference, but to be honest I'm not sure that that matches actual practice. In my mind, the important thing is to check new contributors to make sure that they're meeting standards. Usually this means checking a few of their first articles, and if they seem to be on top of things then maybe checking the one in ten or so (and any Request page articles) until I'm comfortable that they will edit with consistent quality. Most of the work comes in carefully phrasing the feedback to be supportive while setting standards. I don't believe we have explicit rules about who can and can't be a reviewer. Checking the drive and blitz archives, it looks like you're still relatively new at the Guild, although you've certainly been a prolific contributor the past few drives and I see you are a host at the Teahouse, which is useful experience. If you feel confident in you MOS and copy editing knowledge I would support you being a reviewer. How do other coordinators feel? (As a counterpoint, we do have three reviewers signed up now, which is a good number, and it would be great to see your energy go towards reducing our backlogs!) Tdslk (talk) 21:49, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I haven't found any problems with Tenryuu's copy-editing; he has been here for a while so I think he has the experience needed to be a reviewer. I'll be happy to do some reviewing from mid-week. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  07:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , seeing as there are more reviewers now, I'll withdraw my offer. I would love to see more detailed reviews like the one gave recently to get an idea of what a proper review should look like. Cheers! — Tenryuu 🐲  ( 💬 • 📝 )  00:02, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Tenryuu, reviewing at drives and blitzes isn't like reviewing for GAN; we normally just check the diffs to ensure the article has been copy-edited as claimed and that the edits made are actually improvements. If major errors or omissions are noticed, as happened with at least one editor in the May drive, it's a good idea to leave feedback on the editor's talk page. We wouldn't normally do full written reviews due to lack of time and patience, but I wouldn't object if you wanted to do that. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  01:28, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the heads up. — Tenryuu 🐲  ( 💬 • 📝 )  01:30, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Extra colons:
It looks like everyone is getting a colon at the end of their name in headings on the blitz page. Maybe a result of the code behind the "sign up here" button? Does anyone know what's going on there? Tdslk (talk) 00:05, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:00, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It's probably my fault then. Thanks Jonesey; it takes guts to remove a colon! :D  Baffle☿gab  07:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Totals
Thanks to everyone who did reviews! I put up a preliminary barnstar table at the usual place but a few lines are blank because I wasn't sure about crediting some: Since the first three were never claimed as completed I guess I shouldn't worry about them so much. I'll try to take a look at the Manson article today. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:26, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * 's incomplete copy edit of Amit Shah (diff). The editor made some good changes at the beginning of the blitz but they haven't made any edits since 15 June.  I was going to finish it myself and award partial credit (it's still tagged), but some other editors began editing and reverting edits over the weekend and it seems too unstable for further copy edit.
 * had an incomplete copy edit of 4AT (diff) and hadn't made edits since 16 June. Another editor completed the copy edit though it looks like it could use more work.
 * did partial copy edit and clenaup on Walk forward optimization (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Walk_forward_optimization&action=historysubmit&type=revision&diff=963268079&oldid=960922268 diff])
 * claimed a copy edit of Charles Manson, which I feel should be checked since they have less than 400 mainspace edits. Also, it was only tagged for a section copy edit, so the wordcount should be reduced to about 1760.


 * Thanks Reidgreg; I was just checking Flori4nK's c/e and noticed the diff is a comparison with the current version so I've replaced it with a diff that shows Flori4nK's work only. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:13, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I've had a look at the diffs; my comments below are made assuming the c/e was marked "complete". We don't normally credit uncompleted c/es and I don't see either of these examples as exceptions, even though good work was done. It's only a barnstar, innit! :)


 * The body of Walk forward optimization is mostly under-referenced jargon; I can't really understand it and I wouldn't have copy-edited it either. I make the header section 466 words.
 * Amit Shah could definitely use more work; Tau Fermion's work is a minor improvement but so much more could have been done to improve this BLP article.
 * I think the c/e of Charles Manson is a mixture of improvements, neutral changes and mistakes; I'd have marked it with partly done.
 * Aside from a few minor errors, I think Firedogbme's work on 4AT is an improvement.
 * Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  00:53, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've checked the Manson copy edit and adjusted the wordcount, and I'll remove the partials from the barnstars page. – Reidgreg (talk) 22:50, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Barnstars distributed. I tagged on a note regarding the election (since I'm not running and can't be accused of canvasing).  Updated ombox.  FYI, I read at User talk:Total Eclipse 2017 that that account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock, and have withheld the barnstar with a note on the barnstar page to that effect.  The editor may return using their main account if it is unblocked in a few months. – Reidgreg (talk) 18:15, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

What copy-editing isnt
, as a rule of thumb, what shouldn't be handled by us copyeditors? The lack of citations seems to be a big one, and so do extensive copyvios. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  04:46, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Good question... like other WP editors, GOCE copy-editors can handle as much or as little as they wish (with obvious caveats). People (hopefully) come to the Guild to edit because they enjoy copy-editing, which means editing copy; fixing typos, correcting grammar, making text clearer, improving style, flow and structure, etc. Copy-editors aren't expected to hunt for missing citations, deal with big copyvios, balance POVs, interpret poorly translated material, or make articles perfect (but they can do all of these things if they wish). Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:00, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response. Perhaps we can use this to help new copy editors understand what they don't need to do and how to respond to cases like that. It seems like it still boils down to a question of experience, so more experienced copy editors might be asked to share their perspective. — Tenryuu 🐲  ( 💬 • 📝 )  22:22, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * What copy-editing isn't seems like a good thing to tell new copy-editors; thanks for bringing a new perspective and feel free to copy or adapt as you wish. :)  might find this discussion useful too. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:03, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Defintely helpful, I'm adapting some of this to the welcome template. Thanks! Cheers, -- puddleglum  2.0  23:43, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Houston, we have a problem
... with this editor; and I are trying to keep an eye on them, but they doesn't seem to be learning. Maybe I have the wrong attitude, but I find it irksome when editors see a drive or a blitz as a springboard to greatness. More eyes probably needed, and we should figure out what to do about those leaderboard totals. In the middle of a drought, a heat wave (the first of two) and a pandemic, who needs this ? Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  19:23, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , I was just about to post a section asking when would be a good time to get the ball rolling on improving our guidance for newer members. I'll try to help, but life has been keeping me away from WP. Thanks for the post!  Don't know where the drought and heat waves are (definitely not here! =) ) but if it's affecting you, stay safe! Cheers --  puddleglum  2.0  19:36, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * In terms of "getting the ball rolling", I fear this is mostly my fault, as I've been talking up this project for the past few months but haven't started anything yet. Maybe I've been outside too much enjoying my milder than usual summer. In any event, I'll start a section elsewhere so as not to detract from the specific concern that is the main focus here. Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 18:19, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I started a conversation here on the main project page, since that will in theory be the most visible location. Please contribute! Tdslk (talk) 19:07, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Well I'm not in Houston but I've been watching this too; the editor makes some useful and neutral changes but some changes are negative and s/he is missing loads of issues. IMO, s/he should be working more slowly and thoroughly, rather than rushing ahead. I think some partly done and not done templates are in order; a 50% to 75% penalty could be imposed. The month is still young, so let's see what occurs. I hope you're both well, stay safe and take care. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:23, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your wise counsel, Baffle; I was quoting Tom Hanks' line in Apollo 13 . Puddleglum, the eastern Great Lakes have made a 180° turn after several years of wet weather; last winter we had more rain (and ice) than snow, which is not good. Looks like climate change has reached a region which, long ago, threw its fortunes behind Detroit. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  23:46, 10 July 2020 (UTC)


 * When I have time I will go through another article and try reaching out again (for the third time) to see if we can turn this around. This editor shows promise for sure. Back to the heat wave and drought for another day! At least our COVID numbers are plummeting. Stay safe! Twofingered Typist (talk) 11:58, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing, TT; well you can lead a horse to water... :) Perhaps a note about penalties for poor and incomplete copy-edits would help. I'll be reviewing from mid-month; red exes and yellow ticks may appear. I don't enjoy dishing them out though, so I hope the extra attention being given pays off. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:11, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

I've just reviewed A.JulianEditor's changes to Transportation in the Klang Valley and Boy or Girl Paradox. There's a couple of issues here; firstly Boy or girl paradox is a complex mathematical article that has a dearth of references and is unsuitable for copy-editing. A.Julian.Editor did c/e one 180-word section, so I think credit is due but I'd have tag-bombed the article and moved along. He or she did a fair job on Transportation in the Klang Valley, which also has referencing problems but not nearly as bad as the other article, but added one error "West [and East] Coast line --> West Coastline" (now fixed). It's difficult to compare these articles with those at REQ; many are mis-tagged with Copy edit instead of Cleanup so reviewers should take into account the state of the article beforehand. I'd triage if I had more time, but I like to sleep sometimes... :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  04:28, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Update 20/7 No response to my last attempt at communication. Several articles looked at - MOS issues, others have wording changes that are unnecessary. 35,000+ words edited yesterday! S/he is clearly doing a quick scan, making minor changes and moving on. Not sure what we can/should do - check them all or let sleeping dogs lie, or am I simply being too picky? Twofingered Typist (talk) 13:14, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I am concerned with the number of large articles that were completed in so short of a timespan, but in my opinion what's more concerning are the removal of reviewer comments, such as the ones on . They also made a minor edit (which I will assume was done in good faith) and . — Tenryuu 🐲  ( 💬 • 📝 )  15:27, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Communication is required. If the user is being disruptive and lack of communication is becoming a problem, a note on AN is an appropriate response. I'll have a brief look at his or her edits later tonight. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:18, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , before doing so, we might want to ping them here for a discussion before going to WP:ANI. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  00:17, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * If what they're doing isn't up to minimal standards (punctuation, spelling, grammar, and basic MOS) and they're unresponsive to feedback, I'd say that liberal application of penalties is in order, take them down to a token barnstar or none at all. I hadn't thought about ANI, but if they're displaying disruptive editing behaviour then that seems to fit. – Reidgreg (talk) 13:32, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * IMO, hauling newbies to ANI violates WP:BITE; this assumes that the editor really is new, and isn't trolling. Looks to me like a CIR thing: a young editor with good intentions who doesn't have the needed expertise or attitude (the willingness to learn). Since the leaderboard seems to be a BFD to them, withholding undeserved "cash and prizes" (as the US TV game shows used to say) seems like an appropriate sanction. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  14:47, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh boy. I have been watching this conversation, but I hadn't checked any of the edits yet. I picked three at random and found that two of them were so bad that they needed to be reverted entirely, and one needed all of its tags reapplied. If you're keeping score, that's zero for three successful copy edits; they weren't even close to good, and introduced many errors in a variety of flavors. I left a note on the editor's talk page. Unfortunately, I think we're going to have to review all of their edits and probably revert many of them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:26, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree - I'll start going through some of them given time, this month has been really, really busy though. Cheers. -- puddleglum  2.0  23:41, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

I have just gone through and copy edited six articles. One was satisfactory. Frankly, I think it's a complete waste of our time spending the combined days of work it will take to determine whether any of the unchecked articles pass muster. ignored virtually all my attempts to point out areas for improvement (although I see he has promised he'll do better) and continued to "edit" multi-thousand word articles in a matter of minutes. I would suggest we assume that 10% of their work was helpful and modify their article total to seven and 30,000 words. I think all their articles, except those that we have fixed, should be retagged "Copy Edit". Then we can move on and deal with work that interests us. I am in the process of moving so have been unable to do much recently. What do others think? Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:09, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * IMO, penalise, re-tag and move on; life's too short. The one c/e I checked was okay but that seems to be an outlier. I hope this won't be a continuing problem. I didn't check into the editor's non-c/e edits but I've been busy elsewhere. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  21:19, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, fellow coordinators, I feel like I have earned my Lead Coordinator stripes today. I have reviewed all of this editor's as yet unreviewed copy edits. You can see my notes at the drive page. In short, most of the edits were either damaging, inadequate, or both. I was able to revert some of them and restore the copy edit tag on others. On a couple, good subsequent edits had been made, so I either had to do some careful partial reverts or, in one case, leave a message on the article's talk page.
 * I left a note for the editor with a summary. Based on what I saw, I think we should give 5% credit to this editor for the July Drive for both article count and word count. It may seem harsh, but if you take a look at my notes, you'll see that nearly everything was either inadequate or needed to be reverted. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:55, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I left a note for the editor with a summary. Based on what I saw, I think we should give 5% credit to this editor for the July Drive for both article count and word count. It may seem harsh, but if you take a look at my notes, you'll see that nearly everything was either inadequate or needed to be reverted. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:55, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I have no problem with that. Time to move on. You've got better things to do with your stripes :-). Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:58, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Jonesey95, should the leaderboard be adjusted? Certainly the 5% credit is going to affect the barnstars in each of the leaderboard categories—the gold in three, and the silver in all five (including those who would have been in 5th place but were squeezed out). BlueMoonset (talk) 14:18, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes. I put a note on the barnstar page. This editor does not qualify for any of the leaderboard barnstars. Some helpful coordinator will calculate the barnstar table soon, I hope, and the leaderboard will need to be rebuilt manually. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks for checking. To you and other coords: do we want to remove A. Julian from the leaderboard and give first place to the second, putting people who would be sixth place into fifth place, or do we just want to give second place a first place award and just remove fifth place? I hope that makes sense, that was a lot of words. :) Also, where can I read up on the script, or are all the totals calculated manually? I think I've heard of a script, but not sure where to look. Thanks and cheers. -- puddleglum  2.0  19:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think moving everyone one up would be fair. As for the script, I had it emailed to me. A bit fussy but beats doing it by hand. It looks like you don't have an email linked to your account, but if you email me (click "email this user" from the left column on my user page), I can forward you the secret files. Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 04:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * and other coords: (we should get one of those cool ping all coords template that Milhist has ) Okay, I've gone through and replaced A.Julian's standings with the next highest up. In the 5k+ article section, fifth place was with 1 article, so now that that's in 4th, 5th is empty. Who's on fifth? About the script, no need to bother, I probably wouldn't have time to use it anyway. I trust some other enterprising coord will be able to run it! Thanks all. --  puddleglum  2.0  21:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Update August 2

Here is A.JulianEditor's reply and my response to it:

My Work for the Guild
Hello,

I would like to formally apologize for the poor job I did in this past drive. This is all so new to me and not knowing any of the protocols really hindered my ability of doing the best job possible. At your behest, I will not participate in the next drive in order to not cause any more damage. Instead, I will learn more about the guild and its rules. So when I am fortunate enough to participate in another drive, I will be ready to be a great help to you and the rest of the guild. I hope you understand that I put in a lot of effort into the drive this month; my heart was in the right place. I am just juggling a lot of things right now, which I bet you could probably understand. I am still an underclassman in high school, so there is lots of room for me to grow. I cannot wait to get back and help when my knowledge of the guild is up to par.

Warmest regards, A.JulianEditor — Preceding unsigned comment added by A.JulianEditor (talk • contribs) 07:30, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for finally responding. As I wrote in an earlier post to you some of your edits are very helpful. I think your problem, and you acknowledge it here, is that you are "juggling a lot of things". Copy editing requires 100% focus. I never asked you not to participate, I suggested you slow down and work through each article carefully. I trust you will continue to edit but only when you can give it the attention each article deserves. Stay safe. Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:08, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Moving - WiFi Issues
F.Y.I. I'm in the midst of moving and have discovered serious WiFi issues which techs are trying to resolve. My access to WP may be limited.Twofingered Typist (talk) 11:59, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting us know. Good luck with the move and all the best,  Mini  apolis  13:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Back in business. Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:36, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

July awards
We still need to give out the awards for July! It looks like no one else has volunteered, so I'll try to run the script and pass them out today. Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 18:41, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
 * All done (except mine ). Tdslk (talk) 18:18, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:13, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Made me smile.
• An Oxford comma walks into a bar where it spends the evening watching the television getting drunk and smoking cigars. • A dangling participle walks into a bar. Enjoying a cocktail and chatting with the bartender, the evening passes pleasantly. • A bar was walked into by the passive voice. • An oxymoron walked into a bar, and the silence was deafening. • Two quotation marks walk into a “bar.” • A malapropism walks into a bar, looking for all intensive purposes like a wolf in cheap clothing, muttering epitaphs and casting dispersions on his magnificent other, who takes him for granite. • Hyperbole totally rips into this insane bar and absolutely destroys everything. • A question mark walks into a bar? • A non sequitur walks into a bar. In a strong wind, even turkeys can fly. • Papyrus and Comic Sans walk into a bar. The bartender says, "Get out -- we don't serve your type." • A mixed metaphor walks into a bar, seeing the handwriting on the wall but hoping to nip it in the bud. • A comma splice walks into a bar, it has a drink and then leaves. • Three intransitive verbs walk into a bar. They sit. They converse. They depart. • A synonym strolls into a tavern. • At the end of the day, a cliché walks into a bar -- fresh as a daisy, cute as a button, and sharp as a tack. • A run-on sentence walks into a bar it starts flirting. With a cute little sentence fragment. • Falling slowly, softly falling, the chiasmus collapses to the bar floor. • A figure of speech literally walks into a bar and ends up getting figuratively hammered. • An allusion walks into a bar, despite the fact that alcohol is its Achilles heel. • The subjunctive would have walked into a bar, had it only known. • A misplaced modifier walks into a bar owned a man with a glass eye named Ralph. • The past, present, and future walked into a bar. It was tense. • A dyslexic walks into a bra. • A verb walks into a bar, sees a beautiful noun, and suggests they conjugate. The noun declines. • A simile walks into a bar, as parched as a desert. • A gerund and an infinitive walk into a bar, drinking to forget. • A hyphenated word and a non-hyphenated word walk into a bar and the bartender nearly chokes on the irony.

Enjoy. An anonymous, as far as I can tell, Facebook post. Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:10, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Cute. Thanks for the smile and all the best,  Mini  apolis  19:38, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks TT, that gave me a well-needed chuckle. Nice one, :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  23:20, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Great stuff! I've always been partial to Ode to a Spell Checker (a.k.a. Owed Two a Spell Chequer and Candidate for a Pullet Surprise[1][2]|undefined). I'd seen it circulate in emails in the 1990s in various forms and had thought it was added onto as a multiauthor work, but it was written by Jerrold Zar and published in the humour magazine Journal of Irreproducible Results.


 * See the first link above for the full text. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:38, 11 August 2020 (UTC)


 * There should be one for "poorly machine-translated text walks into a bar" ("bad device crosses side into sand"?). Dhtwiki (talk) 23:17, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Back in Business
Hi, just wanted to let y'all know that I should be more active now - my computer broke and then I was on a vacation that was extended longer than I had forseen, so I was unable to do much Wikipedia-wise, but I should be more free now. Thanks! Cheers -- puddleglum  2.0  14:39, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Welcome back! Since you've popped your head up, can you take a look at the top of the Requests page, where you signed up to edit Waiting for a Train (Jimmie Rodgers song)? Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:02, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , sure thing, planning to get to that soon. Thank you! -- puddleglum  2.0  15:20, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

August Blitz
Does anyone want to suggest dates and themes for the August Blitz? I'm easy on both (but not cheap! 😋 ). There's four sign-ups already... make that five.😛 Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  05:31, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for starting the blitz page. It's not very original, but we could do Requests and the 12 remaining June articles in the backlog. Tdslk (talk) 01:34, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Works for me . Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  02:00, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Works for me too. Let's make sure that there is a good note about experience and a higher level of care being required for Requests. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I think this is a good choice. Given our recent experiences, I second the need for a good note. The outline currently reads: "Skilled use of English is especially important for articles listed on the Requests page." I would suggest the addition of the following: "These requests are often being nominated for Good or Feature Article status. It is vital that great care is taken with your copy edit of these articles. If you have any questions, do contact one of the coordinators. Information about the requirements for a Good Article are here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria . Requirements for a Feature Article can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_criteria ." Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:18, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Twofingered Typist, was this ever done? I couldn't find it. Either way, I'd like to suggest using internal rather than external links for the GA and FA criteria: Good article criteria and Featured article criteria respectively. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:06, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I believe this: "Skilled use of English is especially important for articles listed on the Requests page" was added following this discussion, but I could be wrong. Internal links certainly make more sense.Twofingered Typist (talk) 11:06, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Twofingered Typist. Actually, that phrase had been there in earlier blitzes, but it was bolded this time around. I don't see that they used your suggested addition. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:54, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

No, I didn't add TT's suggested text because I didn't want to clutter the top of the page any more than necessary (no offence meant, TT). I'm of the opinion most people don't actually read complex, lengthy instructions. It might be a good time to restructure the text areas of Drive and Blitz pages to make them easier to follow. ; where are we were using external links to the FA and GA criteria? I can fix the template. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  20:28, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , the external links were in Twofingered Typist's suggested text above; if it had been used, I thought internal rather than external links were more appropriate, but as you didn't use it, there's nothing that needs to be done. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:31, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem; thanks for explaining. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:25, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks all for comments; I'll add a note to the page in a bit. Dates? 16-22 or 23-30? I'm fine with either but if we choose the latter, the Sept Drive will start one day after the Blitz closes. Suggest June and July backlog; twelve articles won't last very long. I've signed up as a reviewer from mid-week. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  22:09, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Sounds good, Baffle, although the requests page is very long again. August 16–22 would probably work better, with a week before the September drive. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  00:20, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Done; I've also just removed the section of after discovering the account is sock-blocked. See SPI and user's talk page. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  05:54, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Barnstars?
It's been a week since the August 2020 blitz closed and no barnstars? Has somebody forgotten to fling the bling? The September drive is about to start. Dhtwiki (talk) 00:03, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

2020-08-20 database report is ready
The top 50 candidates for copyediting from the 2020-08-20 database dump are now posted at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Database Report. The 20th of the month dumps are processed a lot faster than the 1st of the month (which I guess includes page history and stuff) so hopefully these will be more up-to-date, as requested last time. -- Beland (talk) 20:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * All done. Most needed tagging for copy editing, so I am happy with the low false positive rate. Please see the page for notes about articles that need further attention from the typo team. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:28, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

September drive bug
I'm not good at this stuff, but when I signed up with the default three tildes I got my custom signature (as I should have). I replaced the drive-page markup with  to prevent this. Hope I didn't break anything. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  23:04, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks Miniapolis; my fault and a known problem, I should have corrected that when i created the page. I couldn't get the code to substitute properly so i left the tildes as a known-working but imperfect compromise. Thanks for fixing it. :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  02:46, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks for doing that; I also got my (very noticeable) customised signature. Seems to be working perfectly. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  15:40, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

September newsletter
Hi all; I've updated the September newsletter, which I think is ready for checking and sending; unless anyone wishes to add anything to it. I'm sorry for the delay in completion. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  01:36, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Great job, Baffle; lots of information, and very concise. I can send it in a day or two unless someone beats me to it. I may have asked you this already, but would you like the mass-message flag? Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  20:04, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes you've asked me before; thanks for the offer but I'm happy to have newsletters approved by consensus here. I don't think I need it unless you or Jonesey would rather I send newsletters in future. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  01:27, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks great. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:38, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I second Jonesey95. Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:00, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I have sent the newsletter. It's always a bit nerve-racking; I have to hope that I didn't mess anything up on 646 pages. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:03, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks all; I think we're safe. If we all stay quiet, they'll never notice the mitakes cock-upps errrrrrors... :D ;) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  19:04, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

2020-09-20 database report is ready
...at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Database Report. -- Beland (talk) 18:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I have processed all of these articles and left you some notes. If you want to refine your filters and then add another batch of 50 from the same database dump, I would be happy to take a look at them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:31, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Posted another batch. Changes to the exclusion code will show up in the report for the next dump. -- Beland (talk) 05:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

September drive barnstars?
Is anyone available to run the script to calculate September drive barnstars? I can do it by hand if needed, but the script is faster, despite its quirks. I don't have access to a Windows computer to run it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:56, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I can do it! Tdslk (talk) 02:21, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Done and handed out (except mine). Tdslk (talk) 02:48, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the quick turnaround. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:57, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Archive bot jumping the gun?
I hope this isn't a problem because I, but when I went to tag Fasana-e-Azad Done it had been archived the day before. I checked my code to see if I'd slipped something in to trigger the bot, but can't find anything. When I pinged, I noticed a similar issue with in June. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  18:49, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The following request for VSCO girl was marked done but I can't see anything else that would trigger the bot to archive the request above it. Both requests look properly formatted to me, though I noticed you added -) to the request; so maybe that triggered the bot. It's the only anomaly I can see, anyway. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  20:59, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've restored the request to REQ and corrected the archive. Naughty bot! Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  21:12, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Baffle, although it could've stayed archived because I finished the copyedit. I wonder if that Smiley tag may be the culprit. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  21:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Is this the same thing that I experienced? — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  21:57, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * It may be similar; the request I was working on was archived before I tagged it done. I used a smiley emoji, which may have confused the bot. Baffle's advice not to add anything after done and the signature is good. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  22:56, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

You are free to add whatever emojis; the bot does not care. The culprit in this case was a single space after  causing it to not recognize the header. This has been fixed. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 06:17, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the info! So I guess the guideline for working with headers on the requests page is "no unnecessary spaces in headers", then. 👍 — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 )  06:21, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I think is saying that the code has been fixed so that a space will no longer cause a problem. Tdslk (talk) 17:12, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes. Exactly what Tdslk said. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 17:50, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Interesting; I didn't even notice the space there! Thanks Zhuyifei1999, Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  21:10, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

2020-10-20 database report is ready
...at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Database Report. I started posting two sections of 50 each, since we did more than 50 last time and about half of the first 50 look like new problems. -- Beland (talk) 17:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

October blitz
I think we need to start the October blitz this coming Sunday (roughly three days from now) in order to avoid squishing up against the end of the month (too spooky!). – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:12, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Sounds good; I've checked all of August and September's backlog up to 'H'; October is unchecked. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  06:07, 15 October 2020 (UTC)


 * We might want to add Requests with experience proviso? Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:28, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Works for me; we don't really have time to throw together a theme . Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  18:56, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed as well. Tdslk (talk) 02:50, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

The Guild's October Copy Editing Blitz will run from 18 to 24 October. Sign up now!
This is not reflected on the Current Blitz page. Someone with computer skills needs to work some magic.

Thanks Twofingered Typist (talk) 20:26, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed. For future reference, the tabs can be edited at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/tabs! Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 23:17, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I have distributed all barnstars for the October blitz except for my own. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * And that has been given out as well. Cheers! Tdslk (talk) 04:15, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

2020-11-20 database report is ready
... at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Database Report. -- Beland (talk) 19:36, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Stepping back, probably
Hi all; I probably won't be a candidate in the December election unless I'm needed. I seem to be running out of coordination steam juice and I feel I'm overdue for a wikibreak. Hopefully we'll see some enthusiastic experienced editors stepping up this time. I'm sorry I haven't been as active as usual, although the long winter nights might change that!

In other news, the December newsletter is in pre-press here.

Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  10:11, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your work on the newsletter, Baffle; it looks great. Stay well, and enjoy your wikibreak and the holidays. All the best,  Mini  apolis  16:37, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, I am not planning to run again either. I am expecting my first child in the spring, so my free time will be greatly diminished! It also looks like has not been active on Wikipedia in three months, so there are multiple opportunities for people to step up. , your emeritus status was always provisional, are you interested in resuming a proper coordinator spot? Perhaps some other Guild regulars would be interested in giving coordinatorship a try? It comes with a shiny userbox! Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 06:06, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Congratulations on the new arrival and yes, family comes first; WP will still be here when the dust settles, and I know from experience that kids grow fast. I'm keeping an eye on who's returning, and will be happy to pitch in as needed. May be time to put out the "help wanted" sign. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  01:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll still be around to coordinate. My governor has us locked down pretty tight, so WP is my way to get out and wander around and try to make the world a slightly better place., you are wise to dial back your commitments. I have told many people: You know those five or six things you enjoy doing? Pick two. And if you have another kid, one of those two fun things will have to go away, at least for a while. Good luck! – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Cheers all, and congratulations Tdslk; do enjoy your free time while you can! :) I've updated the newsletter as far as possible; just awaiting a few tweaks and the December Blitz dates and themes, if any. feel free to edit / add / correct as you see fit. I'll still be around to copy-edit and do the odd bit of updating. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  09:02, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the well-wishes, everyone! I am heartened to see some good names have popped up on the nominations page. I still hope to be around intermittently, and would be happy to pitch in on any projects that align with moments of spare time. Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 01:58, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Barnstars for November
Is anyone available to run the barnstar script for November? I'll be happy to give out the awards. The page is at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives/November 2020/Barnstars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonesey95 (talk • contribs) 00:33, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅,, and thanks for giving them out. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  15:32, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! All given out except my two. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:37, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Dates and topic for December blitz?
How about December 13–19, and Requests for the December blitz? The Requests page is getting a little long. Comments welcome. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:33, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with the timing and subject. Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 01:59, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Sounds good; REQ could use some more attention. :) I'm currently triaging 'C' in the November backlog; thanks to Jonesey and Miniapoils for checking the earlier backlog months. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  02:20, 5 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Good idea. We're nearly finished October and we've now already got 10 for December plus November! Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:26, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Dates and topic are fine by me. Baffle, thanks for chugging through the November backlog. All the best,  Mini  apolis  15:35, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem; I've added the blitz dates to the newsletter, adding in September and October backlog articles (assuming August will be done by then!). The newsletter is ready for checking. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  07:17, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Looks good, Baffle. Let us know when you want it sent. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  16:40, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. Newsletter sent, Ombox updated, and the Blitz page appears to be ready to roll. Teamwork! – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:50, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

I see we have a number of new editors signing up for this month's blitz. Should we maybe add some of the backlog (say, August and September) to the blitz to give them another option besides the Requests page? Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 02:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  02:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That was my thinking too; there might not be enough easy-to-c/e articles at REQ. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  04:05, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. Feel free to amend my note. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Barnstars for December
I checked the last working articles from the blitz and did a manual count for the barnstar page at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Blitzes/December 2020/Barnstars. Nothing too controversial. (One editor accidentally claimed their rollover words from the last drive and I assessed a partial copyedit at 1/2 the total wordcount.) Should be good but perhaps a coordinator ought to check. Just thought it'd be nice to get the barnstars out for Xmas. Cheers. – Reidgreg (talk) 21:42, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I had this on my to-do list for today, so thanks for doing most of the work! I'll check the table. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:23, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * All given out except mine. Happy end of December! – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:08, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * All done now. Stay well, happy holidays and all the best,  Mini  apolis  00:39, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Tito–Stalin split
Another GOCE editor needs to go through the article Tito-Stalin split thoroughly and point out to CHF79 what is expected of a GOCE copy edit.

Should the "Done" tag be struck until this is taken up?

Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:40, 27 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I should add, I am happy to undertake the c/e when I'm finished the one I'm working on.


 * Thanks TT; I agree the article could use more c/e work so I've struck and de-templated the done. Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  17:56, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

I left a note for CHF79 with a couple of links per WP:BITE. Stay well and all the best,  Mini  apolis  00:11, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Coordinator table (alternative)
A while ago, I experimented with the coordinator table, arranging it more like a cast table or sports tournament table. I shelved it because it's trickier to update and might be a bit showy. But I thought now that I'd post it here for feedback. (Perhaps this could be better used in the 10th anniversary annual report than the coordinator page.) – Reidgreg (talk) 18:59, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Coordinator Lead coordinator Inducted as a coordinator emeretus Inducted into the Hall of Fame


 * It's so pretty! (And not just because I like dark green....) I think it would be fun to include a version of this in the annual newsletter in January/February. It looks like a bit more trouble to maintain than the current boring table of editor names, so I think we should probably stick with the simple table for that. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:17, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Luckily, no one earned an H or E while lead coordinator (the low colour contrast would be difficult to read). – Reidgreg (talk) 19:54, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Boy,, does that look good! It's very helpful for people like me (whose memory is getting woollier), and doesn't look difficult to update  Stay well, happy holidays and all the best,  Mini  apolis  20:05, 15 December 2020 (UTC)


 * This is great! I agree it would be a useful addition to the January/February newsletter. Welcome back by the way! Happy Holidays all. Twofingered Typist (talk) 15:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * This is really cool, Reidgreg; thanks so much for putting it together! It could go into the Annual Report as a human interest item, which I haven't got around to writing this year. Perhaps it could go on a sub-page for transclusion or just a link; and the coordinators table is getting kinda long... :) Cheers,  Baffle☿gab  21:20, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Sounds good; I'll tidy it up a bit for the report. I should have time to work on the report in January; I usually like to wait for the last December Requests to be completed before running the numbers. – Reidgreg (talk) 18:34, 18 December 2020 (UTC)