Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-02-25/WikiProject report


 * Can we please get those graphs (or a table of their most recent values) for all the wikiprojects? Josh Joaquin (talk) 07:36, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * That would require an automated program. Perhaps you could find a coder? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:28, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * We've asked the WP 1.0 bot maintainers to generate our table for us, and it is located at WP:USRD/A/S. We also have a live-updating table at WP:USRD/A/L that does not display everything due to template inclusion limits. --Rschen7754 10:35, 28 February 2013 (UTC)


 * This is a great article and interview. Nice work, Mabeenot. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:28, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Awesome article. Just my $.02 Ottawahitech (talk) 23:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * It would be nice if this was automatically generated. If it requires an editor to spend time, even inputting data into a form, well, for me it's not worth the time (I speak as a manager of several WikiProject pages). I'd be happy to sign or monthly reports on how much WikiWork my projects have, but don't expect me or most other projects to have time to calculate this - we have too much wikiwork to do :> --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:32, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The WP 1.0 bot generates the table at WP:USRD/A/S and WP:CRWP/A/P automatically for us. I don't see why the calculations couldn't be added to the WikiProject summary tables.  Imzadi 1979  →   10:16, 1 March 2013 (UTC)


 * To me, apart from the formal FA/GA processes, the other class levels are fairly arbitrary. A better check of the amount of work to do (but still subject to some manipulation) is the number of cleanup tags on articles.  Every active project *SHOULD* be signed up to track their cleanup tags, but lots aren't.  See Svick's list for the recent history and sign up here if you can't see your project listed.  But this is an interesting approach, no reason why it can't be incorporated into the standard WP 1.0 bot statistics page - I've (manually calculated) done up a possible version here.  You would need to work out how to deal with unassessed pages (assume a 6 = stub is probably better than ignoring) and also what value is given to non-featured lists (I've allocated them as a 4 = C class in my calc). The-Pope (talk) 03:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This woks best for projects whse scope is pretty fixed. If you are constantly adding new articles, then a large amount of work will look like losing ground.  Imagine the simplest case:  You have one stub, and a Wikiwork score of 6.  You add three more WP:Perfect stubs.  Now your wikiwork score is 24—much further from the "winning" place of zero—and the average article score hasn't budged, even though you've improved our content significantly by providing good stubs on previously missing information.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:03, 17 March 2013 (UTC)