Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Are the requesters notified of completed backlogged articles?

The name of the requester doesn't appear in the list of backlogged articles, so I was wondering if they get notified when their requested article's copyedit is completed. Thinker78 (talk) 04:47, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

See the last bullet under "Instructions for copy editors" on the Requests page. Some copy-editors place the templates as recommended. I find that most requesters have the article and the Requests page on their watchlists and know when the article has been copy-edited. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:49, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
@Thinker78: if you mean the backlogged articles tagged with {{copy edit}}, no, we don't usually notify the editor who placed the tag (and it may actually take a minute or two to wade through the page history to identify this editor). In many cases those maintenance tags are placed by editors who notice that the article needs work but are not a major contributor to the article. Our Requests page is intended for editors who are major contributors to articles, and gets perhaps 10× faster responses than tagging. But whether they go the requests route or the tagging route, as Jonesey noted, editors will usually keep the articles they edit the most on their watchlist and be apprised of the copy edit that way. If it's not on their watchlist, they may not be that interested in the article some months later when it clears the backlog. – Reidgreg (talk) 08:18, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Monthly progress chart

Should we remove the monthly progress chart that sits on the right side of our front page? It's getting unwieldy (it doubles the length of the page on my screen), and it duplicates info that is more clearly presented in the graph in the Progress section. Tdslk (talk) 17:49, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

I think we should; it served a purpose in the past, but no longer does. All the best, Miniapolis 22:18, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
I agree it's getting too long for the front page. Could it be collapsed by default or perhaps linked in text? Note that the table would only be rendered collapsed by Javascript-enabled browsers, but that's likely the majority of views these days. Are Guild c/e stats recorded elsewhere? Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:25, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
The chart has its own page, which is linked in the first sentence of the Progress section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Progress. Tdslk (talk) 02:16, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
As an experiment, I have split the table into two parts. The first part (2009–2015) is collapsed by default. The second part shows recent progress. I don't know if it's an improvement. I am open to feedback, including the negative kind. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:41, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

In the spirit of being difficult, I'd say that we should show end-of-year totals for all years before now-1 and show monthly numbers thereafter. That gives historical perspective but still emphasizes what's happening lately. Lfstevens (talk) 07:10, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Lfstevens, with thanks to Jonesey for the improvement. IMO, though, years of monthly totals are TMI and obscure the arguably-more-important year-over-year totals. Yeesh, when I came in the backlog was over 8,000 articles :-). All the best, Miniapolis 17:07, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
I also like Lfsteven's suggestion. Tdslk (talk) 19:27, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Annual table added. That is much better; great suggestion. More feedback is welcome. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:51, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Much better. And it's cool to see we've managed to drop the number every single year! Tdslk (talk) 03:21, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
Yes, it's a definite improvement when viewed in my JS-enabled browser. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:28, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

() Looks great, and it's good to see that when I came in the backlog was already down to 5,000 (think it was 8K when the LOCE became the GOCE) :-). Thanks and all the best, Miniapolis 13:29, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

I like the yearly progress; it's a better fit with summary style, plus more green! I trust the monthly totals will be retained somewhere (but not displayed on the main GOCE page). – Reidgreg (talk) 13:34, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Question on lead sentence in today's TFA

Hey folks, I'd love to get some input over at Talk:Murder of Yvonne Fletcher#Lead sentence. Here's the original and a version I wrote. Thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:55, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

@The ed17:, I'd prefer the longer version; the second, shorter version doesn't tell the reader the shot fired from the embassy killed Fletcher. I don't see a need for the comma after the date, which makes an unnecessary pause in the flow of the sentence; it doesn't denote a sub-clause and it's not mandated by the MOS. The paragraph is a bit muddled; "and died shortly afterwards" seems misplaced. Did she die shortly after being shot or shortly after the demonstration against Gaddafi?

We could restructure the paragraph:

The murder of Yvonne Fletcher, a Metropolitan Police officer, occurred on 17 April 1984 when she was fatally wounded by a shot fired by an unknown gunman from inside the Libyan embassy in St James's Square, London. Fletcher, who died shortly afterwards, had been deployed to monitor a demonstration against the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. Her death resulted in an eleven-day siege of the embassy, at the end of which those inside were expelled from the United Kingdom, which severed diplomatic relations with Libya.

Feel free to use this, or a variant, as you wish. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 07:32, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

@Baffle gab1978: I feel your version is clearer and reads much better than the others. For my own curiosity, though, should the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi possibly be either "the Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi" or "Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi"? – Reidgreg (talk) 15:35, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks @Reidgreg:; I noticed the article's header was improved during its stay on the main page. I'm not sure of the grammatical rules involved (grammar is instinctive), though I think the use of a comma in single-item noun phrases is more common in US English than in UK English. I've certainly never been taught to use a comma between terms in a description-name construction, whereas in the reverse situation it's always done (Yvonne Fletcher, a Metropolitan Police officer,). Come to think of it; a Metropolitan Police officer is a dependent clause in parenthesis whereas Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi is a single-item noun phrase that doesn't need a comma to separate it, otherwise it looks as though we're writing about two distinct people. I hope that make sense; feel free to correct me, my brain hurts now! :D Cheers, Baffle gab1978 02:22, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
@Baffle gab1978: I think my problem (i.e.: knee-jerk reaction) is that when preceded by the it feels like there's a tone issue as in the Muammar Gaddafi. This makes me want to either remove the the or use the comma for separation. I'm probably overthinking it. – Reidgreg (talk) 13:06, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Ah, now i see what you're saying; you were taking issue with the the rather than the odd comma. Can I just say "D'oh!" here? ;) If an editor insisted on using the I'd leave it there; either version would be acceptable to me (in fact, one could argue using the Libyan leader is more correct because there's only one leader of Libya), but I'd definitely remove the comma! I'm sorry to have misinterpreted your reply; it happens! :D Cheers, Baffle gab1978 14:28, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Quick grammar check: "meeting hostilities"

I'd like a quick check from someone with better English than me: is "meeting hostilities" the right phrase to use here?

Spain abandoned El Piñal, its trading port in China, after meeting hostilities from the Portuguese

See ALT1 at the bottom of Template:Did you know nominations/El Piñal? If not correct, I'd appreciate a suggestion for a more correct term. HaEr48 (talk) 05:35, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

It's not "incorrect", but I prefer "encountering hostility". All the best, Miniapolis 13:37, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
I think that either phrase is insufficiently descriptive of what actually happened. If there is a historical record to show that one party attacked the other, or blockaded a port, or killed some people, that is what you should state. "Hostility" has a modern meaning that has little to do with physical violence, but I expect that this historical situation involved some sort of physical violence. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:53, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
@Jonesey95: it wasn't clear that there was direct physical violence on the island itself, but there were hostilities, for example in form of blockades and preparations for military conflict. I feel "meeting hostilities" was generic enough to be true in a DYK hook, and for more details the reader can click on the article. @Miniapolis: thanks for the suggestion, I changed it as you suggested. HaEr48 (talk) 19:43, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Outdated link

I'm new to Wikipedia copyediting, and I find Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit very useful. I just wanted to note the link to oldest articles needing copy edit on the project page is outdated (all the August articles have been completed :)), and I couldn't figure out how to fix it. TeraTIX 01:53, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Fixed! – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:44, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors&oldid=842083587"
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA