Wikipedia:Maintenance collaboration of the week

The ongoing maintenance collaboration is the backlog of articles to have bot-modified external links checked.

We need your help to completely eliminate this backlog in the coming weeks.

[[:|WP:MCW]]

This page chooses the weekly maintenance collaboration, to be featured on the Community Portal, among other pages. The focus is on backlogs (see also Category:Wikipedia backlog), the Wikipedia namespace and other maintenace tasks. Your help is needed for this week's collaboration (as shown above), but also in choosing next week's focus.

Procedure

Here's how the selection process works:

One item will be chosen every Sunday. If two items are tied, the oldest one will win. You can show your support with approval voting.
Any backlog which has been cleared may be de-listed. (You may wish to make a comment to that effect, if it is a borderline case.)
If a backlog is cleared before the week is up, the next item should be promoted to fill the remaining days, plus its regular term.
If a backlog still has more than a week's worth of work at the end of its time, it may be automatically re-nominated (starting over with zero votes).
When you vote, please update the tally in the headers.

Nominations

Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than a year, 7 votes

Nominated 01:39, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Beland 01:39, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Fenice 18:28, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Eagle^a^mⁿ 04:55, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
Ronincyberpunk 10:10 5 August 2005 (EST)
shuri 15:28, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
--Exir Kamalabadi^{Criticism is welcomed!} 14:28, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
Renata3 13:43, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

In general, I feel that it's more important to repair existing content before creating new articles, but it makes Wikipedia look dormant or incompetent if things in need of doing are left lying around for a long time. I think six months is a reasonable timeframe for something to deserve extra-special attention; more than a year is certainly more than long enough. -- Beland 01:39, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links, 7 votes

Nominated 01:25, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Comments:

This is the oldest project on Template:Active Wiki Fixup Projects. (Thus it's most in danger of being neglected; this list is also getting rather long, and it would be nice to finish up a project or two.) It currently has active participants, but there is a lot of work left to be done, and I'm sure new "bad links" have been piling up since the last update. This is also a type of cleanup work that is fairly easy to do - you just need to pick which of several possibilities the referring article meant to link to. (It's kind of a fun lesson in vocabulary and ambiguity.) -- Beland 01:25, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm one of the (occasional) active participants. Frankly, I don't think making this a maintenance CoTW will help it much. As Beland stated, the list is getting long, new entries aren't getting added, and there's a lot to be done still. The project is going nowhere. What's worse is that this is likely something that will need to be done continuously in the future, even if this project ever completes. The way it's going now clearly promises trouble ahead for links to dab pages. In my opinion, this is what is needed for this project to complete, and to be repeated in the future:

1. more frequent database dumps, so the list can be updated more often.
2. a "whatlinkshere" tool that ignores User and Talk pages, which only clutter the picture for this project.
3. a User:Humanbot style tool should be possible to write, and could make fixing these pages LOTS faster. However, the first 2 points above are required for this, as well as machine-parsable output of "whatlinkshere". -- Biot 00:33, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

I think we need to narrow it down a bit. I suggest picking 3 (or so) of the big ones to work on. How about: Persia, NBA, and Afghan? if they get fixed, we could add more! --Quadraxis 22:26, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think we'd get more participation if we let people pick a topic that interests them. -- Beland 00:20, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Maybe, but i find that the number of links there overwhelms me. If we got together and picked a few to do this week/day/whatever, it might help. Maybe we should do that anyways? Just take a few of them and say they are this week's Disambiguation pages' collaboration. --Quadraxis 02:03, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - I know the feeling. "Too...many...choices!...Can't...pick!" Feel free to declare a "mini-collaboration" right on that page. Though it might be less work to just say, "Hey, let's all work on the one at the top of the list, since that's the worst offender, and if we're all working on the same one, it'll be more fun." -- Beland 01:13, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    - OK, i think i will. --Quadraxis 18:58, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've done some work on Greek, Chinese, and British, and lately I've been gnawing at Persia. --Eric Forste (Talk) 09:09, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia categories in need of attention, 4 votes

Nominated August 2 2005
Support:

Comments:

Category:Articles that need to be wikified, 3 votes

Nominated 00:40, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Beland 00:40, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Maurreen (talk) 05:08, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
lots of issues | leave me a message 19:01, 7 August 2005 (UTC) Lets down another 500.[reply]

Comments:

In the past week, we've helped clear out about 500 articles from this category. (Yay!) However, there are still over 1,400 still to be wikified. So I'm auto-re-nominating this category for another go-round. -- Beland 00:40, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Transwiki log, 3 votes

Nominated 01:25, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Beland 01:25, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Dmcdevit·t 07:40, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
Maurreen (talk) 05:23, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Backlogged back to March 2005. -- Beland 01:25, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In desperate need. Dmcdevit·t 07:40, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting, 2 votes

Nominated August 4 2005
Support:

Comments:

Stub categories are currently the most common offenders in Category:Overpopulated categories. Beland 01:17, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There's no need for this, the Wikiproject Stub Sorting is doing fine with its 100 participants. CG 10:01, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deadend pages, 2 votes

Nominated 21:31, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Comments:

Good candidate, as it doesnt require any particular skill and is easy. Martin (Bluemoose) 21:31, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Request for comment, 2 votes

Nominated August 2 2005
Support:

Comments:

Wikipedia:Most wanted articles, 3 votes

Nominated 17:43, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Comments:

Working on these is always useful. Jacoplane 02:34, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Articles to be merged

Nominated August 2 2005
Support:

Beland 23:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Category:Wikipedia articles needing style editing

Nominated 01:30, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Beland 01:30, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

There's probably enough work here for a week, and it's fairly easy for people unfamiliar with a subject to so. -- Beland 01:30, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than two years

Nominated 05:36, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Maurreen (talk) 05:36, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

These articles should be forgotten about. lots of issues | leave me a message 02:01, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Not meaning to be a smart aleck, but is there a magic cutoff between one year and two? Maurreen (talk) 05:23, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- Although most of those article requests should also be forgotten about; there is still a gap in the worthiness of two year old and one year old requests. That two year list has been surveyed by many, all of whom, concluded after futile Google searches that there was not enough material write an article on the subject, which is queried less than 10 times per month on Google. lots of issues | leave me a message 22:32, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cleanup from September 2004

Nominated 05:06, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Maurreen (talk) 05:06, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce is also working on these. -- Beland 01:13, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Would another "cleanup" be more appropriate, or they progressing on all of them? Maurreen (talk) 16:55, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Most_wanted_stubs, 2 votes

Nominated 06:22, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Comments:

There are 1000's of stubs and we could try to get rid of at least few. Renata3 06:22, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:NPOV disputes, 0 votes

Nominated 08:06, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Comments:

Backlogged for over a month, with about 1050 articles; could use serious help in adhering to our Core Principle of NPOV. R adiant _>|< 08:06, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Category:Move to Wiktionary and Category:Move to Wikibooks, 0 votes

Nominated 08:06, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Comments:

Backlogged for over a month, with about 500 articles; could use some help in adding to our esteemed sisterprojects. R adiant _>|< 08:06, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_images and Wikipedia:Copyright_problems, 0 votes

Nominated 08:06, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
Support:

Comments:

Backlogged for a couple of weeks, with about 300 articles and images; could use some help, legal tangles should be avoided if at all possible. R adiant _>|< 08:06, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Template for new nominations

(edit this section to see it)

Members

Sources for nominations

Ideas for nominations may be found, among other places, in:

Past winners

Jul 31-Aug 06 2005 - Category:Articles that need to be wikified (flat)
Aug 07-Aug 13 2005 - Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles (7 votes)

Collaborations
Articles
Articles for improvement
Science and technology
Birds Dinosaurs Palaeontology (new)
Miscellaneous
Inactive collaborations Latin music (new)
v t e