Jump to content

Wikipedia:Cleanup

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tearlach (talk | contribs) at 23:25, 6 September 2005 (August 31, 2005: Kirisha dealt with). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The cleanup page is a place where articles with problems (ungrammatical, poorly formatted, confused, etc.) can be listed. Any user can fix or list articles here.

Older cleanup: Category:Cleanup by month. Pages are archived by month, but are still in need of cleanup (or de-listing if they have already been cleaned up).

If you are here because you have found a page that needs attention, you are encouraged to be bold and edit the page yourself to fix the problem. If for some reason you don't have the expertise to fix the problems yourself, for example because you don't know enough about the relevant subject, you can request the attention of other editors as follows:

  1. Check "Resources for maintenance and collaboration" an inset text box on the right, to make sure there is not a more appropriate page on which to list the article.
  2. Add the most specific applicable tag to the article or its talk page (note that having a cleanup tag will be distracting for readers, so only add them to articles if there is a good reason). See Cleanup resources. For general problems, use {{cleanup-date|September 2005}}.
  3. Add your listing under today's date (UTC). Create a new section if yours is the first listing of the day.
  4. Explain what needs to be done in a brief but specific manner in the article's talk page. (Keep in mind not everyone who sees the cleanup tag on the article will see your central listing.)
  5. Sign your name, date and time by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ )
  6. Also remember that you can submit an article in need of cleanup to the Cleanup Taskforce (which is always looking for members).

For more detailed information about this page, see Wikipedia:Cleanup process.

September 6, 2005

September 5, 2005

  • cinnamon - rambling, repeated information, and possibly misleading or outdated information due to relying on 1911 Britannica.
  • The Third World War takes one to a computer game of this title - when there were books written during the Cold War on this subject.
Computer game now at The Third World War (computer game). The Third World War now redirects to World War Three (disambiguation). -Acjelen 04:07, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

September 4, 2005

September 3, 2005

Did some cleanup. --Spinn 05:02, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

September 2, 2005

Proposed VfD as vanity page. Tearlach 14:48, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

September 1, 2005

From Streets of Rage. Cleanup and merge? Tearlach 15:42, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Moved to Mr. X (Streets of Rage), redirected Mr X to disambiguation page. -Sean Curtin 04:00, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
  • Manufacturing This page, and the category tags for Manufacturing and Technology, are not very well structured. It is difficult to navigate, and the structure is not clear. See the talk page for details and a link to a temporary page that would be a first step. Joe1011010 18:11, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 31, 2005

Looks to me seriously like pseudoscience - in the hands of Ken Kitchen the sequence of blessings and curses in ancient contracts was eventually to become one of the most important dating tools of modern archaeology. Yeah, right. Tearlach 00:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 30, 2005

August 29, 2005

August 28, 2005

When I first logged on to the Internet back in 1995, "Mirsky's Worst of the Web" was a featured link from the Netscape homepage. I remember visiting it, though I don't recall much else about it. Extreme Unction 01:40, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Cleaned up now - but needs categories and sources by someone who knows about these things. Tearlach 16:19, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 27, 2005

  • Weimar -- the missing coat of arms makes an unsightly hole at the top of the page... -- PFHLai 01:53, 2005 August 28 (UTC)
  • Leo Strauss I did some grammar and prose cleanup, but the whole thing is written in a very stilted style and would need some more focus and research.
  • Irish_people - Everything's in the wrong place and the whole thing is just confusing.
  • Aura (paranormal) needs a bit of cleanup. I split it off from an omnibus Aura article that covered four topics at once, and so it wasn't seperated into different sections very well. Probably simply adding a few headings would work. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 20:58, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

August 26, 2005

August 25, 2005

  • Traction current Very confusing, mainly due to grammar. Knowledge of the topic is probably needed to word the article properly. I have trouble understanding the topic itself as well as the details as laid out for different systems used in different countries. Sfisher 07:31, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
It gets even more confusing, due to the overlap with Traction power network and Traction current line. Needs some rationalization across the three articles. Tearlach 21:03, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although DC systems are mentioned in the opening text, nothing is said about them in the main body of the article. Mjroots 1900, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
  • Donny Schmit needs wikifying, expansion, and appears to be non-neutral in spots. Al 12:51, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • Red Hot Catholic Love The plot synopsis needs to be cleaned up to sound less choppy and use better language. Although South Park uses profanity; it shouldn't be used in a synopsis unless quoting the show. Phantom784 16:29, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

August 24, 2005

  • Rococo Not very useful. Meandering, disorganized, and very vague. Writing needs to be worked over completly, and I suspect we may need new info too. I tagged it for cleanup, almost tagged as "cleanup-rewrite" instead but I'm new here. Lampros 04:12, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shaitan was found on peer review. It seems a little confused about what it's covering, at least judging by comments in the article: I think this should refer to the islamic entity of Shaitan, as Iblis does not correspond to Satan and probably partly due to that it's language is extremely unclear. It also is seriously lacking sources. I rewrote the introduction, but then got scared that I don't have a sufficient clue to continue. Mozzerati 20:50, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
Also needs cleanup for tone (a bunch of editors seem to think the original Russian comic style is appropriate). Tearlach 14:20, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • John Bigelow The bottom section was added by anonymous user 142.32.208.233 and reads like a potential vanity addition to a legitimate entry. This 2nd Bigelow, described as "Chief Pilot for Pan Am" and developer of "the Bigelow Manoeuvre" (the only references I could find to this on Google were citations of this Wikipedia entry), sounds dubious. Can anyone else either verify or (if bogus) cleanup? Thanks.-MollyTheCat 03:17, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A special thanks to Awyllie for cleaning this up, and to Tearlach for the research provided on the Talk:John Bigelow page. -MollyTheCat 03:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yamasee – Needs wikification. Written in first-person. Seems non-NPOV. Al 18:25, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
Copyvio - it's previously been deleted at last once for that reason. Tearlach 19:26, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 23, 2005

August 22, 2005

August 21, 2005

August 20, 2005

Could someone fix the images?

August 19, 2005

I've tidied up, and popped it into the right cats. Still needs some cleanup, however. Megapixie 07:12, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 18, 2005

August 17, 2005

August 16, 2005

August 15, 2005

  • Palindromes (movie) - a movie review. Zoe 06:27, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
    • Removed the review and replaced it with NPOV content, now it needs attention. MessedRocker 18:44, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • Leap year starting on Monday and the other Common/Leap year starting on (weekday) articles need to be standardized. The most glaring problem is that the linked article uses a very different calendar format from the others, but there are other inconsistencies concerning text displayed at the top of the page, use of borders, text near the links to the other pages, etc. - FunnyMan 15:08, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • World's tallest structures used to delineate between the clear record holders before the mid 20th century, and the muddle that comes after, as the first paragraph states. However, a user has now renamed the table referenced in the first sentence of the article (breaking the link) and added data to it past the clear dividing line. The information may be useful somewhere on the page so I hate to simply revert it, but sorry I do not have time to move everything around. --Pascal666 02:35, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Jedi Civil War is way too detailed and needs to be checked for NPOV and encyclopedic tone in addition to being pared down. Great job for an objective Star Wars fan. Fernando Rizo T/C 04:19, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 14, 2005

August 13, 2005

  • Tried to clear one paragraph but it looks to me as though a major POV problem and a copyvio problem, as you point out, may mean a major rewrite or a serious deletion of images and unnecessary text. dok 08:51, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 12, 2005

Agreed. Slashed and burned.... TheMadBaron 09:04, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 11, 2005

I think a revert will solve most of the problems. Have a look at Talk:Japanese strategic planning for the Pacific (1905-1940) for more details. Megapixie 05:48, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 10, 2005

August 9, 2005

August 8, 2005

August 7, 2005

Alice Artzt needs wikification, a rewrite, and expansion. I Googled her and this looks like a worthwhile article, but I don't have time to work on it. DavidConrad 07:59, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Haffkine needs a complete overhaul. Looks like someone just dumped an existing article here, but Googling key phrases turned up no hits. Should be moved to Mordecai Haffkine, but note that something links to it. DavidConrad 08:11, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 5, 2005

August 4, 2005

C 01:40, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 3, 2005

  • WFAN (AM) includes a substantial amount of material on WNBC which needs wikifying, while at the same time, the material includes some items which are already mentioned in previous edits. I think that there might be copyrighted material in the recent edit to include WNBC history, but I haven't found anything. I also suggest that the WNBC section should be made into a seperate article. ErikNY 13:15, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Omega-3 fatty acid is now a terrible mess. It has problems with NPOV, writing style, formatting, and an immense number of references at the end which are not referenced in the text. Major cleanup work is needed. -- Karada 23:55, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

August 2, 2005

August 1, 2005

More