Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests/Archives/2016

Passenger pigeon
CC-BY-SA declaration; moved from REQ talk by me, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 05:19, 8 January 2016 (UTC). To prepare for FAC, and a possible front page appearance in September, on the anniversary of the species' extinction. I'm mainly used to UK spelling, but have tried to keep this in US spelling, so please check for inconsistencies. If possible, help with citation cleanup (and alt text for images if that is still a requirement) would also be appreciated... FunkMonk (talk) 13:01, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Now at FAC. FunkMonk (talk) 19:45, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Question then; do you still wish for a copy-edit of the article, Passenger pigeon, ? Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 22:46, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * It should probably use AmEng; and looks as though a c/e would still be useful. Funkmonk may withdraw the request if he wants to. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:44, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd sure like a copyedit, I don't trust my Ameng skills at all. It isn't far in the FAC process anyway. FunkMonk (talk) 15:42, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Will start copy-editing tomorrow. Corinne (talk) 03:02, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! FunkMonk (talk) 22:06, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

✅ Corinne (talk) 03:31, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks again! FunkMonk (talk) 16:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Decline Draft:Cliff Lett
Should we decline Draft:Cliff Lett? It's a declined submission in draftspace with questionable notability (I haven't checked yet)? I'm not opposed to helping the editor out though. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I suggested that we keep it on hold here until it either moves to article space or gets to the top of the Requests list. I am willing to be persuaded otherwise. The requester's request was barely intelligible, which makes it hard to know what he/she wants from the GOCE. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:47, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Good idea; we have enough to do in mainspace without copyediting drafts. The requester may mistakenly believe that a GOCE copyedit will help the article avoid deletion, and I wouldn't be averse to declining it until it's in mainspace since we have that option. All the best,  Mini  apolis  14:55, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks all; as I said I'm not adverse to anyone who wants to help out, sometimes a c/e can remove any doubt about notability and suitability for inclusion in WP. I think leaving it for a while is a good idea, though I noticed the draft has been re-submitted. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:20, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

I've just checked notability; I found 0 results in G-news, 0 results in Google Scholar. He gets a single mention here in New York Times. I searched the major UK papers (Independent, Guardian, Times and Telegraph) and found nothing, and also gets zero on the BBC. Unless I'm missing something here, I would conclude the subject isn't notable outside the radio-controlled racing community. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:56, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Didn't know there was a radio-controlled racing community :-). All the best,  Mini  apolis  00:07, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah well, you learn something new every day. ;-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:51, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Try pay a visit to a model/hobby shop and ask them this because that is the stereotype of the hobby. Donnie Park (talk) 03:29, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Just an observation; I also pursue niche hobbies :-). All the best,  Mini  apolis  17:56, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, if you're into that kind of stuff, Anne, then the course I'm taking mentions that there was once a World Watching Paint Dry Championship. It was said to have taken place in Stoke-on-Trent. I've been to that town. It's the kind of place where the aforementioned sport would indeed be one of the most exciting pursuits available. Simon. --Stfg (talk) 18:43, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

It's time to decline this article, without prejudice to future submission when the article has been moved to article space. I'll take another coordinator's action to do so as consensus. Post here if you disagree. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:28, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅; BRD if so inclined; I'll archive the request in a few hours. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 17:21, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Empower Playgrounds
Although it survived a 2010 deletion discussion as no consensus, I don't think the subject meets WP:CORPDEPTH and have renominated it. Suggest we decline this one. All the best,  Mini  apolis  21:37, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It's only 750 words. I'll take it unless there is a consensus to decline. I think the copy edit request was made in good faith. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:05, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Jonesey, although its length wasn't a factor; we were requested to provide sources, which made me concerned about notability. I think the organization is non-notable after I looked for sources, but the AfD discussion will decide that. All the best,  Mini  apolis  00:07, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've placed the request on hold pending the result of the AfD discussion. I've no doubt of the requester's good faith but she has no hand in the article's content. I've found a couple more sources but these seem to be one-sided and based on press releases. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:17, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, let's let it go through AfD or see if someone provides sources. No problem. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:56, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Mukti Bahini
CC-BY-SA declaration; copied from Requests page by me. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:24, 1 February 2016 (UTC) Requesting copy edit, I plan to take it to GA status. Grammar is my primary concern and also prose. Thank you.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 03:36, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This is a Bangladesh article and likely falls under discretionary sanctions per RFA. Copy-editors may also wish to check its recent history. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:44, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The edit-warring is a definite concern; if it continues, the article should be declined until it settles down. However, copyeditors shouldn't shy away from articles covered by DS; I've copyedited WP:ARBIP pages without problems. All the best,  Mini  apolis  17:56, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Just checked its talk page (as I should've done first :-)), and I don't think it's subject to WP:ARBIP; the page isn't tagged with Ds/talk notice, and the back-and-forth editing concerns Pakistan and Bangladesh rather than Pakistan and India. However, unstable articles are uncopyeditable; thanks for the heads-up, Baffle. All the best,  Mini  apolis  18:07, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
 * It is stable now, and back and forth editing has stopped as the editors involved have moved their editing to other pages. Thanks.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 09:03, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:16, 25 January 2016 (UTC) Okay, I took a look at this, and I'm afraid it's beyond my abilities. I could improve the prose a little bit; but the article is just so full of sentences completely lacking in context that any real improvement would also be a complete overhaul; this I have not the knowledge to undertake. Sorry. Vanamonde93 (talk) 05:54, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I'll try to work on it then, but on one condition; , you are to become my translator of any areas that need clarification, further information, translation or other misc. "stuff", broadly construed. If that is good with you Vinegary, I will start working on it. Just ping me back with or drop me a message on my talkpage. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 00:53, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Is this necessary?, if you don't understand the article, the best things to do are to a) ask the requester to clarify confusing text; b) check the sources if any are provided; or c) abandon the copy-edit and let someone else pick up where you left off. Coordinators aren't expected to translate from foreign languages or have arcane knowledge of historical foreign conflicts, broadly construed or otherwise. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:14, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * JE-eezzz, how the holey cheese did I put Miniapolis in? I don't know what I was thinking but I'm not editing while drinking coffee in future. So sorry, wrong ping target, and thanks for the pick-up there . I've just fixed the where the ping was meant to have gone to. Again, not drinking while editing again and sorry Miniapolis. (Weird though, I didn't get a notification from you Baffle about your ping at me). If anyone wants to throw smelly things at me, my talkpage has the auto-button in the top-right corner, just under the Wiki search bar. *prepares for the onslaught* Apologies, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 05:37, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem, doc; my ping threshold is very high, and if it's not the OBOD or thanks I don't get it. Ignorance is bliss on WP :-). All the best,  Mini  apolis  20:54, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


 * - posted on the main page, not sure if that was alright or not, but I'll update this spot as well. Just revert me if it wasn't. Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 01:11, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No problems; extended discussions should come here to avoid clutter on the page but it's fine for normal request notifications and short notes to be posted there. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:59, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Mary, Queen of Hungary
, thank you for your bold and comprehensive copyedit of the article, dedicated to the life of an unhappy monarch. After your hard work, the article can be a GA candidate. Have a nice day! Borsoka (talk) 04:01, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Great! Thanks for the notice. Corinne (talk) 03:50, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Three requests at once
I'm not trying to be some kind of vigilante but has exceed the request limit. In the top of the page we have "You may have up to three open requests at any one time. This is enforced so that every request can have a fair chance of being fulfilled within a reasonable period." Currently, there are 6 requests by Aoba47. Btw, I remember there was some kind of note at the end of the page but it's not there anymore. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have removed the requests so there are only three open ones up on the page. I apologize for not seeing that there was a request limit. Aoba47 (talk) 18:41, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you both; as you can see by the length of the list, we're shorthanded :-). All the best,  Mini  apolis  20:48, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

John Sigismund Zápolya
, thank you for your thorough copyedit of the article. Now the article is ready to GAN. Have a nice week! Borsoka (talk) 02:39, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Albert Einstein
I've placed the request for Albert Einstein on hold because it doesn't appear to be a c/e request; feel free to BRD if you disagree. I think we can decline this per WP:SNOW if fails to reply. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As discussed on the request page, better just delete it and explain why to the requester. It's clearly a misunderstanding. --Stfg (talk) 02:16, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Removed. The question was answered, and it's not a copy-edit request. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:46, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Ynglingatal
As I mentioned on, this request seems to be going nowhere for a number of reasons and it may be best to decline it. All the best,  Mini  apolis  20:02, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * My reply is here. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:35, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * c/e ✅. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:39, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Matthew C. Keifer
I've placed the request for Matthew C. Keifer added by on hold; the article reads like a resumé / cv which I don't think a GOCE copy-edit can fix. Coordiantors, feel free to BRD-revert if needed. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:29, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Took a look at the article, and I think its subject meets WP:ACADEMIC (if not it's time for AfD, although Empower Playgrounds is already languishing there :-)). IMO it's an appropriate request, although our energies are better spent on potential GANs and FACs. All the best,  Mini  apolis  14:47, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd like to leave it on the list. I'll take it in the blitz. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:00, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Jonesey. It doesn't look like too much work, mainly converting the CV-type proseline to paragraphs. I'll keep working from the old end, and will probably be off-wiki (from Friday to Monday) at the end of the blitz. All the best,  Mini  apolis  15:08, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Sukumar (director)
CC-BY-SA declaration; copied from Requests page by me, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:43, 25 February 2016 (UTC). A future GAN is possible and a thorough c/e shall be of great help. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 08:47, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This seems good, but it feels like there are some sources missing in the first paragraph/section. Can anyone confirm this? DubitoErgoCogito (talk) 00:34, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * DubitoErgoCogito, "Early and personal life" looks well-referenced to me; specifically which area of text are you concerned about? Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:38, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Baffle gab1978 The section of text at the immediate opening of the article. DubitoErgoCogito (talk) 02:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I did not include any reference in the lead section, adhering to WP:LEAD. All the content written in the lead is summarised from the body of the article and everything has been referenced there accordingly. Hope this helps. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:10, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, thank you! I'm not as familiar with the WP:LEAD formatting yet; I'll go back and look over my notes more. Thank you very much, Pavanjandhyala DubitoErgoCogito (talk) 11:58, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ DubitoErgoCogito (talk) 12:32, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Star Tribune
Thank you for the thorough copyedit of Star Tribune! It reads much better now and I really appreciate the help. Nsteffel (talk) 03:57, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Glad to help; it's been a contentious article in the past, and you're really improved it. Good luck with GA and all the best,  Mini  apolis  14:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Leavin' (album)
CC-BY-SA declaration; moved here from Requests page by me, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:24, 29 February 2016 (UTC) I would greatly appreciate a thorough c/e of this page on a Natalie Cole album. I recently created and expanded this page in a relatively short amount of time so it definitely needs to reviewed for grammar and flow as I am sure there are several mistakes and areas for improvement. Thank you in advance for your help! Aoba47 (talk) 07:34, 26 February 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅ DubitoErgoCogito (talk) 14:52, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the article needs more work; checked diff. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:27, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * What do you recommend be done about the non-free content tag? DubitoErgoCogitoErgoSum. 14:33, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * From a copy-editing point-of-view, that's not our concern, but if you wish you can ensure all non-free media use conforms to the relevant policy. thanks for your further work on the article. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:30, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have removed all the material that qualified the page for the non-free content tag and have dealt with that matter so it should no longer be an issue. I have put the page up for a GAN and it has recently gone through a reassessment to be promoted to a B-class article. I would appreciate another c/e as I caught and fixed several errors in the page and I am almost certain it can still be edited in terms of grammar, spelling, and clarity. Thank you for your help! Aoba47 (talk) 04:35, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ - I have gone carefully through the article and fixed multiple issues. I hope that it's good to go now. Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:42, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! Aoba47 (talk) 17:49, 28 February 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅. Still had minor problems. See diff. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:26, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Devanahalli Pomello
I would like a review of my copyediting and other work on Devanahalli Pomello before taking credit (966 words) in the March drive.--DThomsen8 (talk) 15:36, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Checked; see here. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:07, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Lech Wałęsa
I've placed the c/e request for Lech Wałęsa on hold; it has been undergoing recent, rapid development, mainly by the requester, that might affect a full copy-edit. Last edit as of my timestamp; 20:23, 24 February 2016‎ (UTC). Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:48, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm the requester and I already finished the major development of this article. If someone would volunteer to start its c/e now, I would be more than happy to immediately cease my further activities on it, to preserve the c/e results. But if you insist that this article should still "settle for a while", I'll accept it. Thank you. Daniel (talk) 13:00, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note that the requester made twelve edits after posting the note above, including one seven minutes ago. Whoever takes the article should post a note on the Talk page letting editors know when a copyedit has begun. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:47, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks both; the copy-editor might also like to post GOCEstartce on the requester's talk page; it is fully compatible with GOCEtb and can be replaced with the latter when the c/e is done. / Daniel, please let us know when your development work on the article is finished and the article is stable, and one of us will strike the on hold notice, which is purely advisory. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:39, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I will wait for several days and when I feel the article is stable and no more new edits are likely, I'll post here a message. Thank you. Daniel (talk) 20:59, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've taken the request Off Hold as it seems to have settled; last edit as of my timestamp; 10:15, 3 March 2016‎ (UTC). The usual caveats apply. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:55, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists
CC-BY-SA declarartion; conversation moved from Requests page by me, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC). The article has already undergone copy edit. However, as it seems, it still needs further copy edit. Mhhossein (talk) 08:00, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * . This article looks copy-edited to me. I have responded on the article's Talk page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:53, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Jonesey95: Thanks for your ultra-swift response. Mhhossein (talk) 17:01, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Mhhossein, I c/ed this article on 2 March 2016; (diff of c/e). Perhaps your expectations are too high?  Baffle gab1978 (talk) 18:55, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Baffle gab1978, it isn't Mhhossein's expectations that might be too high, but those of the person who put a "Copy edit" template on the page yesterday with the edit summary "this article has inconsistent grammar and punctuation". Since the point behind the original copyedit request was to satisfy issues raised at the article's DYK nomination, and tagged articles really can't be passed at DYK, you can understand why Mhhossein was concerned, even though your copyedit looked fine to me. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:02, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

✅. I have gone over this article with a fine-toothed comb. It is copy-edited. I have removed the tags. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:44, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Four nominations
Saff V. currently has four requests on the list, above the maximum of three. Since the fourth of these, The nationalization of the Iran oil industry movement, added on March 15, was for an OTD that was proposed to be run on March 17, three days ago, I'd like to suggest that it be the one that is withdrawn/removed for the time being. The other three are for DYK nominations where the prose needs to be improved if the articles are to be linked to from the main page, and are far more time-critical. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:22, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Our usual practice is to notify the requester of their unintentional error and let them remove a request of their choice. This has always worked for me. I have notified this editor. Thanks for noticing. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:34, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Your usual practice seems ideal to me. I wasn't sure how it would be handled, so I made the suggestion in case you decided rather than offering the choice to Saff V. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:56, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Statistics about requests for 2015
I analyzed GOCE Requests for calendar year 2013 and repeated that analysis for 2014, and I've done it again for our 2015 requests. I analyzed the request-to-completion time for all requests submitted in calendar years 2015 that appear on the 2015 and 2016 Archive pages.


 * We handled 543 requests in 2015 and 2016 that were requested between January 1 and December 31, 2015 (compared to 527 and 489 for 2013 and 2104, respectively). This includes Declined and Withdrawn requests.
 * The average completion time was 22 days, down from 30 days for 2014 requests and 41 days for 2013 requests. (The median time was 17 days, down from 32 days in 2014.)
 * The longest wait was 118 days (the second-longest was 78 days); only 31 articles waited more than 60 days and only 5 waited more than 70 days. This is similar to last year, except for the single 118-day outlier.
 * We handled 64% of articles within 20 days of receiving the request.

Let me know if you have any questions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:02, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

History of South America
I suggest that we decline this article for now. has given it her best shot, but the page requires cleanup (WP:TNT has been proposed) which is way above our pay grade and we have enough requests as it is. All the best,  Mini  apolis  20:19, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I've declined it, but here are the request-page links:
 * I've been working on History of South America which I think will make a good article with a little more work. Any help copyediting will be appreciated :-D Marek . 69    talk  06:54, 22 March 2016 (UTC)   – Corinne (talk) 23:05, 31 March 2016 (UTC)  This article is not really ready for a copy-edit. See User talk:Corinne and .  – Corinne (talk) 03:31, 1 April 2016 (UTC)  Mini  apolis  22:58, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Donald Trump
Since the article is being so heavily edited (which is to be expected at this time), I suggest that we decline this request until it settles down. Thoughts? All the best,  Mini  apolis  16:58, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I would lean toward declining it unless an editor really wants to take it on. Since it's been on our page for three weeks and is at the top of the list, I'd say nobody has been excited about it and it's time to decline. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:11, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Decline Emily Ratajkowski for now?
This article has had two copyedits already and is on its fifth FAC; the existing issues seem unrelated to prose. Since the last copyedit didn't end well and no one seems willing to step into the ring again (I'm certainly not), I think we should decline it until the FA fever subsides. Thoughts? All the best,  Mini  apolis  23:43, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll take it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:28, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, given the requester's petulant response here ("Haters gonna hate" etc) about the previous FAC reviewers' comments, and his "outrage" diff at the previous c/e, I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole. Further, I shall ignore any of his future requests. Have fun. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:50, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * If I'm not having fun, I take a long walk. I'll dive into this sexy mess and see what happens. So far I've found a couple of typos, nothing too controversial. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:58, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Advaita Vedanta
Discussion moved from requests page for future reference.

This is a bulky article with many edit styles. Have worked on structure and style but it needs significantly more work. A copy edit will help put it up for featured article list. Nrityam (talk) 07:02, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * – Corinne (talk) 20:05, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Article is still in flux. See Talk:Advaita Vedanta. I will resume copy-editing when article has become reasonably stable. – Corinne (talk) 01:24, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Should it then remain as a request for now? – BroVic (talk) 16:36, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay in responding, BroVic. I've been busy. I just looked at the article and see some recent edits, but not as many as before. No one responded to my comment on the article's talk page.  Do you think the article is stable enough now so that a copy-edit can be done? – Corinne (talk) 02:25, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * per the active editors for the requested article. See the Requests talk page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Cheers (season 7)
I've placed the request for Cheers (season 7) on hold; the requester says he's still writing the article, which displays an "Under construction" template as of my timestamp. the page's history indicates some ongoing activity, but less in the last few days. I've asked the requester to inform us when he's finished working on it so a c/e may occur. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The requester has removed the template and is done editing there; I've struck my hold notice. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Cheers (season 7)
CC-BY-SA declaration; moved from Requests page diff. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:53, 28 June 2016 (UTC) Once I complete filling in the whole article, feel free to remove anything that is too trivial or less helpful to readers, especially some parts of summaries. Everything else also needs copy editing. George Ho (talk) 17:39, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * ; as of my timestamp the article is displaying an "under construction" template., please inform us when you've finished working on this article; there's not much point doing a full c/e while the article is still "under construction". Please feel free to discuss this request on REQ talk. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:03, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The tag is removed. George Ho (talk) 21:57, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks George; I'll struck my "on hold" notice. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:40, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Post (Björk album)
CC-BY-SA declaration; moved from Requests page diff. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:53, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

I've been expanding this article a lot lately, and I would like for it to eventually reach GA status. A copyedit would be very appreciated. Regards, Bleff (talk) 23:42, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * A section of the article is marked as under construction.   MediaKill13   (  talk  )   14:05, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The article history doesn't show much recent activity since the request. Could the c/e commence with the exclusion of the marked (short) section, or should we wait and decline if there's no response from the requester, who has been inactive for several days? Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:33, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the copyedit should proceed on the other sections, but I'm currently working on another request. When I finish, and if the request hasn't been accepted by another copyeditor, I'll resume it.   MediaKill13   (  talk  )   05:29, 26 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I found the release and promotion and composition sections rather confusing, with lots of details I considered unnecessary. Should probably be reviewed.   MediaKill13   (  talk  )   06:21, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll have a go. Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:45, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ There were multiple releases, formats etc... as a marketing tools so this info. made sense. Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:34, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Government of Islamic Republic of Iran
I've just placed this request on hold; the article is newly created, is tagged for cleanup, and is still undergoing editing by the requester, who is its creator and sole editor. It looks unstable and ongoing editing could interfere with a c/e. Last edit per my timestamp: 02:07, 4 July 2016‎ (UTC). If any coordinators disagree, please remove my notice. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It appears to duplicate much of the content of Politics of Iran. I have proposed a merge. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:11, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * When you propose a merge like that, you should also place a Mergefrom template on the destination page, and the discussion should be at that talk page, not at the source page's talk page. This is important because the present page will not necessarily be noticeable to Wikiproject members, whereas the destination page will be. Gory details are at WP:MERGEPROP. I have added the requisite template and copied the discussion so far from Talk:Government of Islamic Republic of Iran to Talk:Politics of Iran. --Stfg (talk) 14:54, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks both; I've also noted on the Talk:Politics of Iran that the forking probably breaks CC-BY-SA atribution requirements. I don't think it's ready for a full c/e; there's little point working on text that will be replaced/removed/summarised. What do you and the other coordinators and  think? Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree. Tdslk (talk) 01:03, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * This article is nowhere near ready for a copy edit. We should decline until it is no longer under development and has moved beyond the Draft stage that it is currently in. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:44, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, decline. --Stfg (talk) 07:54, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. I have marked the article as declined and notified the requester via the editor's talk page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:54, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Belated agree. – Corinne (talk) 21:31, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Vasilije Ojdanić
Content moved from WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. See that page for edit history. Moved discussion regarding Vasilije Ojdanić from Requests page for future reference. (I don't know what, if anything, to leave out.) The completed copy-edit has been archived. – Corinne (talk) 16:07, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Article is in need of c/e, structure work, fan-cruft removal etc. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:54, 4 July 2016 (UTC)


 * As things are, this guy fails to meet the WP:MUSIC notability guidelines. He's an amateur singer who is good at big-upping himself, not a major (or even minor) Montenegrin pop star. Robyn2000 (talk) 14:10, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:54, 28 July 2016 (UTC) (@Robyn2000 propose deletion, then.)
 * ✅ Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:00, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Fourth request
User:Mr. Smart LION has just made his fourth active request for a copyedit, exceeding the three-request maximum. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:36, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I've removed my fourth request, so there are only three open ones up on the page. I apologize for not seeing that there was a request limit. Mr. Smart ℒION  ⋠☎️✍⋡ 16:48, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

2013–14 Vancouver Canucks season
[attribution: moved from Requests page on 19 August 2016.] The GA Reassessment back in May found significant grammatical issues throughout the article, including shifting tenses, confusing sentences, and so on. Whichever editor picks this up may wish to refer to said reassessment (linked above), which does note issues with specific sentences, though some points there will be outside the remit of a copyedit. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:46, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Given that this article looks as though it will need to be completely rewritten would it not be advisable to ask Spilia4 the last major contributor to have a go at it? The requester was a GA reviewer who (deservedly) challenged and removed its GA status.Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:43, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Twofingered Typist, Spilia4 was a drive-by GA nominator who had made a single edit to the article prior to the review, and only eight more edits during the course of it in response to requests by the original reviewer. Given how little was actually contributed in these edits and its problematic quality (the reason I did the reassessment when it was listed despite the many issues remaining), I think it is clearly inadvisable to ask Spilia4 to take charge of any edits, even if there is a respond to your ping. I hope the GOCE will be able to work on the article as I requested. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:39, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Having looked at those edits, I must agree with BlueMoonset. For example, one of the edits caused "December through February" to be referred to as "this month". Another introduced a large paragraph of breathless run-on sentences, colloquial clichés and at least one grammar error. I think this request is valid. --Stfg (talk) 09:12, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean! I'm not much of a sports fan but I'll attempt to clean this up. Twofingered Typist (talk) 12:17, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ - finally!! If anyone knows how to reduce the white space between the lead and the body of the article, please do so.Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:17, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Jonesey95 fixed this issue. Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:24, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Bad Boy Bill
Moved from requests page.  Mini  apolis  20:32, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

God awfully written, few references. Laun chba  ller  20:38, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: Requester has never edited that article. Is there any reason to prioritize this article by putting a request here rather than simply tagging the article with Copy edit? Also, copy editing does not cover the functions of Refimprove. --Stfg (talk) 23:14, 19 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Since Lead GOCE Coordinator Jonesey95 is on a short wiki-break, I'll attempt an answer. On the main GOCE page, WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors, just under the heading "Requests", we read:


 * The Guild maintains a Copy Edit Requests Page, where editors can request copy edits on articles they are working to develop and improve, or want to nominate for Good Article, A-class or Featured Article status.


 * So Stfg is right in pointing out that Launchballer has never edited this article especially since at this time s/he would be unlikely to be nominating it for Good Article, A-class, or Featured article status. A bit lower down on that WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors page we read:


 * The Requests page is not for:


 * Articles that are undergoing rapid development, are the venue for edit-wars, or have other major problems that may result in a copy edit being replaced or reverted. Copy edit requests for the above may be declined after discussion. Also note that the GOCE is not Cleanup.


 * There is a link at Cleanup, taking readers to a page where one can post problems seen in articles. Perhaps this is an appropriate place to post this article, listing at least one of the problems seen in it. There is also Today's articles for improvement, but that is mainly for articles that get a good number of page views and need development. So, Tdslk, would you agree that this is a request that should be declined? – Corinne (talk) 01:02, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree. This article isn't right for the requests page for the reasons above, but it would be suitable for tagging. Tdslk (talk) 13:48, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I've tagged the article. This request is declined for the reasons explained above. – Corinne (talk) 17:49, 20 August 2016 (UTC)


 *  I just looked at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors, and there are some instructions at the upper right-hand corner under the heading "Unsuitable for copy-edit". Should I have followed those instructions? Should the tag be "Cleanup" rather than "Copy-edit needed"? – Corinne (talk) 17:58, 20 August 2016 (UTC)


 * , that particular instruction relates to tagged articles, not to requests. What you did is fine. I've made so bold as to add a Refimprove tag as well. --Stfg (talk) 18:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Sayyid
Moved from Requests page:

Can you please fix the disambiguation and distinguishing links at the top of the article. Could you also improve the lead section. Furthermore the layout and style of the article need to be redone to become encyclopaedic.Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:18, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Copyediting is not cleanup. We will edit the prose, but other editors may need to fix the article's layout and links. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:59, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. I will be grateful if you are able to edit the prose. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 10:37, 4 August 2016 (UTC)  – Corinne (talk) 19:14, 22 August 2016 (UTC) ✅  – Corinne (talk) 15:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Note: I've done the best I can. The article still needs work. – Corinne (talk) 15:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I'd like to add that I concentrated on improving the prose, and I didn't remember the request to "fix the disambiguation and distinguishing links at the top of the article". I'm not very good at that, so if someone else wants to take that on, I'd be grateful. – Corinne (talk) 16:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Morteza Avini
Moved from Requests page:

The article was nominated for DYK some last month. It was copy edited once, however they still think that it needs to be copyedited once again. Some of the points are mentioned here. I'm ready for making clarifications. --Mhhossein (talk) 11:52, 10 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Vanamonde is on this article. --  M h hossein   talk 06:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ I came to this via DYK rather than the GOCE, but since I've done guild requests before, I'm going to mark this as done. Vanamonde (talk) 07:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Interstate 440 (North Carolina)
''' Moved from Requests page. '''

Need this article looked over for a 2nd GA review. First failed for reasons that this copy edit will fix.--Ncchild (talk) 22:25, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * --Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 17:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ (talk) 17:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Pinged Zppix for insufficient effort.  Mini  apolis  19:54, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * . – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. Pinging . did not perform any copyediting. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:06, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Characteristics of common wasps and bees
Moved from Requests page.

Can someone look and help me with the table as I can't do it (I don't know how to do it).  Varun FEB2003   I am Offline 15:24, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see any copy editing that needs doing to this. The table looks fine to me. Please could you clarify what needs doing to it. --Stfg (talk) 14:37, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
 * . The requesting editor does not appear to have edited this article, and it is not a prose article with significant copy to edit. I made a few minor copy edits to the table and the lead sentence, but it looked reasonable before I started. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:43, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

DataCore software
Moved from Requests page.

Requesting general copy edit for this page. This article is in grave danger. If possible try to add Protection TAG. Thanks in advance.-- Behaver (talk) 05:13, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * . See DataCore Software. This article (with a lower-case "s" in "software") appears to have been created as an end run around deletion. Feel free to resubmit if a stable article results from the deletion review and creation of sensible redirects. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:03, 30 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: I don't think it's necessary to copy very short items like this on to this talk page, which could become cluttered as a result. It will be in the history of the main page. There's not a lot to say about this request anyway, since the article has been deleted and the requester indeffed. Copying here is mainly for long discussions that may form part of the guild's future thinking, isn't it? --Stfg (talk) 08:46, 1 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Stfg Oh. I'm sorry. I didn't really know. Shall I remove this discussion, as well as some others above? – Corinne (talk) 14:35, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * There's nothing to say sorry for, Corinne, and please don't bother to remove any. I'm only making a suggestion for the future. Cheers, Simon. --Stfg (talk) 16:18, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 * FWIW, Simon, I agree with you. This only started recently, and is not necessary. All the best, Anne  Mini  apolis  17:02, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Shila Amzah on hold
I've boldly placed the above article on hold (diff ) because there is currently a copyvio investigation flag on it, which Twofigered Typist (thanks TT) noted on 24th September. Coordinators might care to discuss the matter; feel free to revert my edits if necessary. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:47, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Perhaps this should be declined, since the copyvio isn't going away and the req has been on hold for a week now. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:43, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree.  Mini  apolis  14:14, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
 * From an outsider's perspective, this makes sense. The nominator can always submit a new request should the article survive in some form or other after the conclusion of the copyright investigation. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:15, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I have marked it as declined. Tdslk (talk) 16:56, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Question about Trenyce Request
Hello, I have a quick question regarding my request for a copyedit for the article Trenyce. It seems odd to me that a majority of the surrounding requests have already been addressed and completed while the one of this article has yet to be answered.

I was wondering if this has anything to do with the "Unreliable sources" tag on the page. I want to clarify this by saying that I was the primary user that expanded the page, and added the tag after I was made aware that one of the primary sources is unreliable/not appropriate for Wikipedia use. I have decided to stop any attempts to expand the article further (as I feel that I am not qualified or experienced enough to work on this article), but I would greatly appreciate a c/e as it was brought to my attention that there was several "sloppy errors" (which I agree after reading through it again).

I apologize if I come across as rude or impatient as I greatly respect and appreciate the Guild, but I was uncertain since a majority of the requests placed at the same time are either completed or being worked on. Thank you in advance. Aoba47 (talk) 15:10, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It shouldn't; it's not like it's nominated for deletion or anything, and it's not a long article (i.e. a quick copyedit :-)). Although when I work on requests I do the oldest ones first (I'm taking a break and working on the backlog), most other copyeditors skip around and are free to copyedit whatever they want. All the best,  Mini  apolis  18:25, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the response. I just want to make sure that I do not make any mistakes on my end. I hope that you have a wonderful break :-). Aoba47 (talk) 18:34, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Have no fear! I will probably pick it up in a while, that is, if no one else beats me to it. I'm interested in learning about this personality. – BroVic (talk) 18:42, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 20:17, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Advaita Vedanta
It seems the delay in copyediting this article is also holding back the other articles from being copyedited, so someone please resolve this. I also see that Twofingered Typist has placed "done" on a few requests, but has yet to archive them; this is another factor that holds my article from being copyedited. I suggest the GOCE act sooner. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:25, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Neither of those things is holding up any other volunteer copy editing. For reference, for 2015, we completed 543 requests, of which 31 took more than 60 days. Our average request wait time was 22 days. Our oldest current request is 27 days old, so we are doing quite well at the moment.


 * Pinging, who has been asked to respond to a question about Advaita Vedanta. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * A blocked user cannot respond outside their talkpage. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:35, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I had not realized that. Since the editor has been blocked indefinitely, I recommend to my fellow coordinators that we decline this request. Pinging two of this article's most recent active editors for feedback: and . For their information: this discussion is in regard to this copyediting request. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:49, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I see this article has already been declined, but in general I would support that requests from banned users be automatically declined. Tdslk (talk) 18:00, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * After Nrityam was blocked, there's been little editing there. As it is now there are two referencing styles being used. I use sfn, whereas MSW uses the standard ref-tag. No problem for the two of us, so maybe for us it would be convenient not to change that. Our focus is the content, and we can work fine this way.   Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   07:35, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * @Jonesey95: Thanks to others and you from GOCE for the effort so far. You all do amazing work. Yes, I am fine if you decline the GOCE for now, given the requester @Nrityam account has been blocked. That article needs some non-GOCE attention first, to study the edits made by @Nrityam. Either @JJ, I or someone else can then renominate, when the article is more ready for GOCE team. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:38, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I have declined the request, without prejudice to future submission of a request. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

I just noticed that Relationship between Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism is also on our requests list, a request from an editor who is currently indefinitely blocked. Pinging and  again to ask if you would like us to copy-edit this article. We're happy to do so if you think it is ready. Otherwise, we will decline the request as we did for the article above. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:00, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I lean towards a decline again, but am okay if @JJ's reviews and re-affirms the request. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:10, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I go alomg with Ms Sarah Welch.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   05:16, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

The following discussion has been moved from the Requests page for future reference:

Relationship between Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism

New article sourced from existing article Advaita Vedanta for ease of referencing. Request copy edit to nominate for GA Nrityam (talk) 08:57, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * this request per talk page discussion, without prejudice to a future nomination. – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:09, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Michael I of Wallachia
Iazyges claimed this review three weeks ago, on November 5, but hasn't started it yet. It would be a shame if the current drive failed its goal of completing all of the October Requests because of this one review. Iazyges, if you don't have time to do the requested review at the present time, perhaps you could make it available for someone else to take care of? Many thanks for addressing this promptly. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:56, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I have struck my claim. Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  19:35, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Varun Parandhaman
I'm not going to waste my time on this bit of paid editing, and I suggest that no one else waste their time either. IMO, we should decline this one since it doesn't meet WP:MUSICBIO. All the best,  Mini  apolis  02:17, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Links to discussions: May 2016, July 2016, all of User talk:Imrust and Talk:Varun Parandhaman. After looking at this article for a while, I am inclined to agree with Miniapolis, even though the article does need copy-editing. It's not sourced at all (after I removed the "references" that were not actual sources), so copy-editing at this point would be a waste of time. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:42, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Decline request for The Independent?
A copy edit of The Independent has been requested by on the basis that "this article seems to have several comma splices". I looked through it and found not a single comma splice. Actually, imo the article is rather well written. The requester has never edited the article and hasn't indicated any intention to further it in any way. Decline? --Stfg (talk) 13:28, 11 October 2016 (UTC)


 * What about:

etc. Should there be a comma before "and"? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 14:20, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
 * "... it was controlled by Tony O'Reilly's Independent News & Media from 1997, and sold to Alexander Lebedev in 2010."
 * "The current editor, Amol Rajan, was appointed in 2013, and its former deputy editor"
 * "In the 1990s, The Independent was faced with price cutting by the Murdoch titles, and started an advertising campaign ..."
 * There are problems with italics and quotation marks in this article. We should edit it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:56, 11 October 2016 (UTC)


 * None of these are comma splices. Please refer to the definition at the beginning of the article I've linked. The middle example, where you've cut the sentence short, I believe to be correct, because there is a change of subject ("was appointed" is understood), and also necessary for clarity. I would certainly omit the commas from your first and third examples. There are a gazillion Wikipedia articles that violate this convention, though. Why single this one out? I would think it needed correcting before a FAC, but I don't think it would (or should) fail a GAN just for that. Commas are a matter of convention, not statute law. --Stfg (talk) 15:06, 11 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm probably incorrect to call them comma splices, but some of them seemed to be improper use of commas. Why this article?  I went to it as a reader wanting to find out about the newspaper and I saw several commas after "ands" that didn't seem like they should be there. And English was my worst subject which is why I asked here. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 16:13, 11 October 2016 (UTC)


 * my thinking was that the requests page is full of requests from editors who have worked on articles and stated the intention to take those articles forward to some milestone. Those are the editors who need our help as soon as they can get it. The requests page is, by any other name, a queue. The principle that requests from people who haven't edited the page should be declined is one that you yourself have applied, for example in this edit (also visible three sections above this one).

Here we have a case where an editor who wanted to read about something spotted some poor punctuation in the article. The editor has never edited the article and indicated no intention of developing it at all. It would have been fine to tag it "copy edit for punctuation". You spotted some other problems. So what? -- still fine to tag it or fix it. Why does it need to occupy a place in the queue and so delay our helping other editors who are working towards FACs and GANs and DYKs and what have you?

This talk page should be a place where we discuss matters like this and reach consensus decisions about them. I found your dismissal too pre-emptive in timing and too directorial in tone. I might not have said that, but this is not the first time that I think you have acted in too authoritarian a manner. Please refer to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Coordinators/Archives/2016. I was very unimpressed with your reversion of an edit whose edit summary made clear that the reason for the edit was to correct non-compliance with WP:LEADSENTENCE, and with your ingoring my reply explaining that I had first checked with other FLs. It seems to me you were acting there once again as if you saw it as your job to overrule.

Finally, I think you seriously overstepped in this edit, in which you saw fit to raise the hint that an editor might have been acting out of "malevolence" (your word). At that stage, there was absolutely no grounds to suggest that. Imho there still isn't. He has been blocked for disruption now on grounds of CIR -- not "malevolence". There is evidence, of which you are well aware, that he's probably only just a teenager.

These things make me suspect that you are seeing your role as one of directing, supervising, and even sometimes overruling editorial actions, rather than simply of leading and coordinating. Please disabuse yourself of that notion.

Sorry everyone for the dramah, but I feel that this needed saying. Yesterday I handed in my coordinator emeritus badge, and removed myself from the GOCE lists. Better I leave you than prolong this. I'm also going onto semi-retirement. You have the reasons right here.

I will watch this page for a few days in case anyone wants to comment. Please do so here, not on my talk page. Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 15:57, 12 October 2016 (UTC)


 * There seemed to be so many problems with commas and I was unsure about correcting them that I decided to ask for help. I put in "WP:copyedit" and found this, so I thought that someone here would want to help.  I didn't know about the copyedit tag.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 17:35, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * That's fine, Bubba73, and thank you. But Jonesey95 does know about it. --Stfg (talk) 18:02, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I put the copyedit tag on the article - I hope that gets someone to work on it. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 19:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, Bubba; Stfg's comments have nothing to do with you. Jonesey, I hope you carefully consider what Stfg has said because I agree with much of it. I was lead coordinator for only six months, but your style of leadership differs significantly from mine; I believe in rolling up my sleeves and working alongside fellow GOCE members, and you seem to favor a more top-down approach. A number of capable and experienced copyeditors (including Diannaa, Torchiest and now Stfg) have moved on, and there's no way of knowing if this is a factor but it's possible. I'm certainly not questioning your dedication to the GOCE, but a good "boss" doesn't run roughshod over their colleagues (especially those who have been around much longer than they have).


 * Simon, I'm sorry to read of your actions and hope your semiretirement is short-lived. FWIW, I think your assessment of Varun is valid but—at the risk of sounding harsh—WP is not for children. Have fun and all the best,  Mini  apolis  18:09, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much Anne; that's most helpful. I agree about WP and children -- especially at that age when wings are being tested and not yet working to best effect. Where I go for my daily walks there's a family of swans with six cygnets, and I'm now seeing how well that analogy works. All the best, Simon. --Stfg (talk) 19:00, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the comments of everyone here, and I will give them some thought. I agree that I should be more open to suggestions from other editors. I will try to do better. My experience here as a coordinator and lead coordinator has been that it is helpful to have someone around to make decisions when discussions are stalled, and as far as I can recall, this is the first time I have received negative feedback (correct me if I am forgetting something). After reviewing my curt post above, I think that I should have offered it as a suggestion rather than a decision.


 * As detailed on the Coordinators page, part of my role here is to "help to informally resolve disputes and keep discussions from becoming heated and unproductive." It looks like I have been emphasizing the former at the expense of the latter. Thanks for the open and honest feedback. Keep it coming, and if you think that a change of leadership is advisable during the December election, by all means speak up. I will absolutely not take offense, and I will continue to participate in the GOCE in a different role. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:13, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your grace, Jonesey. I appreciate what you do; being "it" isn't easy, and I'm very grateful for your streamlining of the drive and blitz stuff. You have my confidence for as long as you want to stay on as lead coordinator. All the best,  Mini  apolis  19:24, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Jonesey. --Stfg (talk) 19:51, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, these are not comma splices. They are Oxford or serial commas, and their use or non-use is a matter of style, not grammar. --Thnidu (talk) 22:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. I was wrong to call them "comma splices".  They seemed wrong to me, but I didn't know so I asked here.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 23:24, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

-er or -or?
I just noticed the word "Requestor", in the phrase "Requestor's user name", at the top of the tables at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests/Archives/2016. I had never seen that spelling before, so I looked it up in Merriam-Webster and saw that both "requester" and "requestor" are listed as acceptable spellings (right after Def.4 under Definition of Request – transitive verb). Then I saw "Requester" at the top of the page in the phrase "Instructions for requesters" at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests.

It's not a big deal. I just wondered if anyone feels these should be consistent, or should we leave it alone, since now it gives equal time to the two spellings. Are there people who use the -or spelling? – Corinne (talk) 23:42, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I did a search for "requester" and "requestor" in en.WP article space, a biased sample no doubt, but maybe worth something. I got 174 for "-er" and 68 for "-or". (Tip: Search for the word in quotation marks.) If someone wants to change all of them to use the "-er" form throughout our pages, that would be fine with me. Not a huge deal in the scheme of things, but it's nice to be consistent, especially when we're trying to set a good example around here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:49, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * FWIW, I think -or is the older spelling (possibly based on Latin); -er is more consistent with current English use. Think either one is still correct (although "requestor" has that squiggly red underscore which spares me much embarrassment :-)). All the best,  Mini  apolis  15:07, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I am used to the -er spelling, so "requestor" looks odd to me, but I remember years ago being surprised when I started seeing "adviser". I had been used to "advisor". (Now, there is a squiggly red line under "advisor".) I think Miniapolis is right that the spelling convention has changed. – Corinne (talk) 15:30, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanksgiving Orphans and Cheers (season 7)
All I can say, other than what I've said to George and on the requests page, is that I've copyedited other Cheers articles for him and haven't changed the way I copyedit. I accepted his request for a Thanksgiving Orphans copyedit, did part of the plot section and discovered when I returned that George had reverted the section pretty much to the way it was; the prose, IMO, needs a fair amount of work. I suggest declining the first and, possibly, the second (I'm sure not gonna touch it :-)). Thoughts? All the best,  Mini  apolis  23:21, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I have marked the first article as declined, with an explanation. As for the second one, I think we should take each request independently and hope that requesters can learn from their (good and bad) experiences. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:35, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the second opinion, Jonesey. Since I've copyedited a number of Cheers articles in the past without complaint, I don't know what to make of this; it's annoying and a waste of time to begin a copyedit requested by someone who doesn't seem to really want one :-). All the best,  Mini  apolis  13:54, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Sigh a big sigh and move on. I try to spend my time fixing articles. Fixing people is outside of the scope of our project. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:32, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Some of this may be timing, because the copyedit was clearly needed, but GA processes happened unexpectedly. The original copyedit was requested while Thanksgiving Orphans was still awaiting a GA review. (The GA nomination should not have been submitted until after the copyedit was completed, but that's another issue entirely.) The GA review and listing took place on June 24, at a point when the prose was even worse than it is now; the article should never have been listed as a GA. (I rather expect it will ultimately be delisted.) Twofingered Typist opened a GA reassessment on June 29, with significant comments from editors (including myself) on July 4, 6, and 8; the problem is that a reassessment that finds significant issues means that remedial action on the article is needed to prevent delisting. What George Ho should have done was posted that a GOCE was in process and that he'd attend to whatever fixes remained to be done afterward; what he instead did was plunged in to address the many changes requested although the GOCE was active. Equally unfortunately, many of his edits are creating more prose problems. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:17, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * FYI, I worked on the Cheers season 7 article for the December blitz, explained my understanding of the MOS:TVPLOT guideline, and George seemed to have more reasonable expectations (no doubt learning from these experiences). Reidgreg (talk) 17:36, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Explanation
I just wanted to let everyone know why I haven't been editing for a week. My computer was giving me problems, so I took it to a repair shop and only got it back today. I'll catch up with any archiving that needs to be done and get back to editing tomorrow. – Corinne (talk) 04:19, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Glad your computer's fixed and everything is okay. Having several coordinators is a good thing; life happens, and there's always someone around to pick up the baton. Happy holidays and all the best,  Mini  apolis  14:48, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I rarely do Request archiving, since I find it tedious (ironically enough, since most of my edits are repetitive fixes to citations and templates, which most people would find extremely tedious but which I find relaxing and satisfying), but I saw that there were eight or nine completed requests, so I archived them. Teamwork! – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:40, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, ; when I went to archive Zenobia, I expected some work I didn't have to do :-). Happy holidays and all the best,  Mini  apolis  23:51, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, both. I have figured out that the easiest way to archive is to have two windows open so I can see the information that I need to type on the archives page. Best wishes for the holidays and for a happy, healthy new year in 2017! – Corinne (talk) 00:20, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Trump request
Donald Trump has been requested. This article, as one might expect, is not stable. It is being edited hundreds of times per week. Anyone taking on this copy-edit request should be aware that their edits will probably not survive long. Should we choose to decline this request? Some brave copy-editor might be willing to try to sculpt the wind, though. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonesey95 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I just took a look at the article. It's long (> 12k words). It's in good shape grammar-wise, with just a few spots that obviously need work, based on my quick perusal. It could use a quick touch up, especially by someone who might keep it on their watch-list and help keep it shape. That being said, I'm usually not the one doing requests, so I'll hold off trying to make any final judgment. Dhtwiki (talk) 03:59, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd decline it until it settles down; trying to copyedit an unstable article is a waste of time, and article instability is a documented reason to decline. All the best,  Mini  apolis  14:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I would normally agree, but I don't think this article will be settling down in any reasonable way for the next four years, which is why I thought it might be worthy of discussion. I guess I'm willing to let someone take it, as long as they understand that their edits may be washed away in the next tide. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:34, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * May as well say this now as later; I have no intention of copyediting the article, now or in the future. All the best,  Mini  apolis  01:16, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Is anyone here willing to copy-edit Donald Trump? If not, we should decline. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:13, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see it as worth the effort to polish something that unstable. This is, and will be for the foreseeable future, one of the most frequently edited articles. As soon as we would be done, it would be time to go back in and work on all of the changes that had been made since we started. Tdslk (talk) 16:01, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Is it possible to protect or semi-protect a section of a page? I'm considering specifically Early life, Personal life , and Awards and accolades , topics that are least likely to change quickly but still likely to attract vandalism. ... Hmm... Could we make those into subpages, (semi-)protect those pages, and transclude them into the article? --Thnidu (talk) 20:23, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Another way to look at it is that because it is a frequently visited article, it behooves us to have it as well written as possible. It will reflect well on Wikipedia if it is well written and reflect badly on Wikipedia if it is poorly written. Whether or not we protect or semi-protect sections, perhaps this is the kind of article that we should re-visit regularly over the next four years to keep it in good shape. – Corinne (talk) 23:27, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * has a good point; however, I don't think POV-pushers reflect on me as a WP editor. I think the only way to go would be full protection, which can be requested at WP:RFPP. However, the onus to do that should be on the requester; we have enough work to do with other articles as it is. All the best,  Mini  apolis  23:44, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The article has had 95 edits in the last four days. I suggest that we make a decision when it gets to the top of the Requests page. If anyone wants to take it at that time, great. If not, I think we should decline based on stability concerns. I am open to other opinions and options. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:49, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree; it's nearing the head of the queue, and I don't see it settling down sufficiently for a copyedit at this time. Happy holidays and all the best,  Mini  apolis  18:34, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
 * ... and since it's at the head of the queue and is still being substantially edited several times a day, I'm declining for continued instability and have notified the requester.  Mini  apolis  21:27, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Thanks for the discussion, everyone. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:39, 28 December 2016 (UTC)