Wikipedia talk:Article Improvement Drive

I've overhauled this page to include a members section amongst other things. I would also like to possibly list a few articles a day that could be improved to potentially become a GA or VGA on this Wikipedia. Any complaints with me adding this? Cheers, Razor flame 20:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First thoughts[change source]

Firstly, well done Eptalon, good start and hopefully this thing may take off. I haven´t got long so just my first feelings on what we have here at AID.

The page needs to be directed to within the Simple English Wikipedia main template, preferably given priority over things like Translation of the Week and Requested pages (which usually contains at least two pro wrestling articles...)
Instead of simply copying the PGA, PVGA and proposed demotion topics over, we should think of a way of deciding on an article, think of whether it can be GA or VGA and then go for it. For this to work, we need to keep the article options to a minimum.
We need to keep the discussions about modifying the PGA and PVGA criteria going as well. It´s already hit a brick wall at Simple Talk. I think we need to come up with a definitive proposal, perhaps going through the criteria one at a time and coming to a consensus (i.e. not a vote!) on what would be best?

The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 20:06, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More thoughts[change source]

Here are just some thoughts:

This is for GA/VGA candidates that need help; ideally there is more than one of these articles listed by category
This should not be a copy of the proposals page
This should not be for general article help, outside the P(V)GA process. (there is Peer review) for that
If we list too many articles, we have like ten editors working on five articles; we should be "focusing" the community effort, not dispersing it into many small teams.
We should get some "dynamics" into it; meaning next Saturday, there will be new articles listed.
Once the article is up for voting, its usually too late.

Other than that, how do we entice the community to contribute - The (V)GA process should be about making better quality articles, not about making more stubs. --Eptalon (talk) 20:31, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think what you´ve said is very similar to my feelings. So, let´s reduce the volume of the page right now, down to, say, Nudity or Orange (fruit). Let´s start off by proposing them as potential candidates for Good Article status (which they are on the busy PGA page already, but hey...) and let´s go through the articles defining what we think is exactly required to be proposed safely for GA status? It´s also worth pointing people at en.wiki for references, for instance, and for ideas on sections that may need including or expanding. The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 20:43, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would have to agree with TRMOT here. I've already trimmed down the page a bit, and will remove another article shortly. Furthermore, to help keep the amount of articles on this page down, what would you say to adding a subpage to this that lists articles that could be great articles for GA or VGA? Like a list of potential GAs or VGAs? Cheers, Razor flame 20:56, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2 articles, per category - to stay for a week; and yes, potential "candidates" could be discussed, but please do so on a subpage. And next week we rotate all of them. --Eptalon (talk) 21:11, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course. My proposal was to have a subpage that lists all potential candidates. Cheers, Razor flame 22:16, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Number of articles[change source]

Hello there, I think the idea of this page is to provide a focus for the community; for this reason I think we should not list more than 3 articles per category. Note: we already have the PVGA/PGA listing that lists all of them. --Eptalon (talk) 12:31, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would start with suggesting perhaps only one... true focus.... The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 16:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]