Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors/proofreading

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Finetooth (talk | contribs) at 01:03, 19 January 2008 (→Requests for successful FA not acted upon: deleted Tamil language). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Requests for FAC and FAR articles

Requests for GAC and GA/R articles

Requests for GA articles being reviewed prior to FAC nomination

Requests for successful FA not acted upon

These articles have already passed FAC, despite the copyedit request not having been answered. However, copyedits are always useful. Please move articles here if a copyedit was requested above and the article is now FA.

NB: not all comments about "moving this here" are still accurate - mostly they had been moved to 'general requests' after they passed FAC.

  1. Bengali Language Movement (edit talk links history)
    from talk page: EMERGENCY! HELP!! HELP!!! The article Language movement has gone to it's FAC quite some time back. The principal obstacle in it's way of graduation is the copy. I myself am a bad copywriter, and none of the other editors working on the article are very good copyeditors either. Besides, two of the key editors interested in the article have somewhat gone out of business, and the copyeditors I have worked with before seem to be busy elsewhere. Please, lend a hand. It's an emergency. If copyedit is not done fast, it might fail the FAC. Aditya Kabir 15:38, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm looking into it today. However, ideally it would have been best to have copyedited it BEFORE it was submitted to FAC. Trusilver 21:44, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    this is now FA under new name - Bengali Language Movement, rather than Language movement. Cricketgirl 14:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Troy McClure (edit talk links history)
    My copyediting skills are pretty rubbish, and being English I use English spellings, which don't help in articles about American subjects. The article is a GA, and I aiming for an FAC soon. Gran2 16:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC) Is now an FA, so moving here. Gran2 19:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Development of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (edit talk links history)
    Only current concern is copy-editing. I can address any issues which are directly brought up pretty quickly myself, but for a comment like "needs copy-editing before it can be considered for promotion. Find someone new." it is pretty well demanded that I ask for outside help. Much thanks. Geuiwogbil 03:32, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Promoted to FA 30 August 2007. → AA (talk) — 01:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Song Dynasty (edit talk links history)
    this Chinese history article is a FA candidate, but the only remaining objection so far seems to be that it needs professional copyediting and proofreading, hence help from the League of Copyeditors/proofreaders. Thanks, --PericlesofAthens 08:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    All structural issues have been addressed; copyedit would help. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Article moved to this section as it is no longer an FAC. Epbr123 16:27, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    duplicate request from talk page: Hello. I have recently put a lot of work into the Chinese Song Dynasty (960-1279 AD) article, and it looks very proficient and much more professional with the edits, additional information, and structural changes I have made. I have even nominated it for FA status. However, as user:tony1 has pointed out, it still needs some tweaking and editing with some of the wording. I was wondering if you, the distinguished copyeditors (if time allows in your busy schedule), could have a look and apply those excellent editing skills. Honestly, it would be an enormous help. Thank you. --PericlesofAthens 00:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    back at FAC. Cricketgirl 14:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Promoted to FA on 25 August 2007. → AA (talk) — 01:14, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Georgetown University (edit talk links history)
    GA reveiwer recommended posting here. I think there are some places that could use outside help, but I think this one would go very quickly. I hope someone can look at it soon. Warmest--Patrick 05:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    moved here as this passed GAC. Cricketgirl 06:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Moved here as it's now FAC. I really think this just needs some quick work.--Patrick 03:41, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Promoted to FA on 4 September 2007. → AA (talk) — 21:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Héctor Lavoe (edit talk links history)
    A current FAC, I have cleaned up the prose as much as I can but I may need the help of a proffesional copy editor. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Promoted to FA on 3 September 2007. → AA (talk) — 22:00, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Ramón Emeterio Betances (edit talk links history)
    I nominated this for GA, and there are users who think that it might even be past that stage by now... except for a few of its references and its proofreading in English. The references are almost fixed; OTOH Awadewit suggested raising the article to your collective attention. Chris the speller took a good look at it and fixed most typos, and claims the article is pretty decent by now. I'm no native English speaker, but IMNSHO it is almost done. I might be wrong... so please help me by taking a look and fixing any blatant grammar mistakes... please... Demf 13:22, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Currently a featured article. → AA (talk) — 01:05, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Freedom Monument (Riga) (edit talk links history)
    I've just nominated this at FAC. I worked on this article few months ago, I'm not a native speaker of English and, though I remember that some users corrected my mistakes and therefore I deem that this article has already been copyedited, I'm not so sure about my recent additions to the article. Now I find my self wondering if there should or shouldn't be article in some sentence or double lettering in some word. Note that I tried to use American spelling -- Xil...sist! 15:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Promoted on 24 September 2007. → AA (talk) — 08:09, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Freak Out! (edit talk links history)
    This was not copyedited before being approved as a FA, and I would like someone to look at it. The quality of the writing looks okay to me, but I would like to make sure that this is not nominated to be delisted. Also, I'm not so sure about the formmating of the Infobox. (Ibaranoff24 15:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]
  10. Supreme Commander (edit talk links history)
    In desperate need of copyedit. So far, I've done the lead and the infobox. —Daniel Vandersluis(talk) 17:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Moved here from "In Progress". Need appears to not be too desperate anymore, since it is now FA. :o) Galena11 02:45, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Bruno Maddox (edit talk links history)
    I alone have worked on this. The voice of a copy-editor would be appreciated. It could be fine, but I won't know until a few of y'all give it a proof-read. Please do. Thanks.-BillDeanCarter 06:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Is FA. Galena11 22:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requests over 3 months old

Backlog status

Please list new articles at the bottom of each section, using a # to number the articles. Remember to sign your entries with four tildes (~~~~). For instructions on using the project templates, read Wikipedia:WikiProject_League_of_Copyeditors#How to use templates for copy-editing.

In progress

List here articles you have partially copy-edited. Note how far they have been copyedited (e.g., up to Section X) and update as necessary. Consider placing the {{WP:LoCE:In Progress}} template on the article's discussion page. Move completed articles to section "Ready for final proofread" below.

Ready for final proofread

List articles at the bottom of this section that have been copyedited and need a proofread. Place the following at the bottom of the article talk page as a new comment:
==Copyedit==
{{WP:LoCE
|{{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}
|~~~~

}}

  1. Fijian traditions and ceremonies (edit talk links history)
    I copyedited this and I just need someone to double check it. --Skunkmaster 03:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm sure this was ready for a proofread in July, but now it needs a new copyedit. There have been too many changes and it's rather disorganized. I'm leaving it here for now, because I'm not sure where else to put it. SlackerMom (talk) 17:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Toronto Raptors (edit talk links history)
    FAC that has prose issues. Editors involved are working hard to address MoS issues, so prose will soon be the only issue that remains. Quadzilla99 18:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    All structural issues have been addressed; copyedit would help. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    As above, only pressing issue left is copyediting. Thank you! Chensiyuan 10:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm moving this here as the article passed FAC but still needs some copyediting. Quadzilla99 15:38, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Copyedited, main concerns was informal tone. Cricketgirl 22:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Bratislava (edit talk links history)
    This article is currently in FA candidature page. The last of remaining major objections seems to be copy-editing. Although it hasn't received criticism for particularly bad prose, copy-editing would be appreciated to bring the level up to standards and remove repetition between some sections. MarkBA t/c/@ 05:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    (forgot to comment when I moved it here, oops...) This looks good to me now. Quite long. Cricketgirl 21:04, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Abbas Kiarostami (edit talk links history)
    Up to the 1980s. Rintrah 09:36, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Copyedit completed....Proofer should watch out for some lengthy and complex sentences (lots of them) esp in "Fiction and Non-fiction" subsection.....Ready for proof...Gprince007 16:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Consolidation of Sweden (edit talk links history)
    -- it is a short article but a couple of sentences are confusing and would need a helping hand. I'm not that skilled in copyediting English myself, and am hoping someone here would be sufficiently interested in the subject. / Fred-J 21:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Joey Barton (edit talk links history)
    I had a random copyediting request for this one, I think it's pretty much ok but another pair of eyes would be appreciated. Cheers, Cricketgirl 14:38, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Chennai (edit talk links history)
    This article is in FAR currently and just got moved down to FARC citing prose and MoS issues. I've done some cleaning up myself, but it needs some expert attention quickly. Thanks. Lotlil 13:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm working on it now. Should be done in another day or two. Finetooth 04:31, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    All done. I focused on MOS issues and prose tightening in hopes of helping Chennai keep its gold star. The proofreader might want to check the discussion page and Wikipedia:Featured article review/Chennai to see what other writers and editors have been saying. Finetooth 02:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Scrubs (TV series) (edit talk links history) [Added: 09:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)]
    Currently trying to bring this up to GA status, reads ok to me but i need a unbiased editor just to read through, make sure it flows ok, and has no major problems. Thanks Jac16888 09:39, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ready for proof. Galena11 19:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Golden Film (edit talk links history) [Added: 09:45, 7 October 2007 (UTC)]
    User:Karanacs commented to the FA candidacy of Golden Film: "Much of the article needs copyediting. Some sentences are short and others are overly long or clunky. Not all paragraphs flow well; some seem like they are just a collection of facts strung together." I haven't traced these problems myself, so I would like to ask the League of Copyeditors to look into the matter. – Ilse@ 09:45, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I tried to deal with the problem of "facts strung together" by dividing the history section into two paragraphs. – Ilse@ 15:28, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ready for proof. Galena11 22:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Parapsychology (edit talk links history)
    -- This article might still need a few copyeditors to go over it and make a few corrections. It's a Good article and is going to be a FA soon however before nominating it again I want to make sure all copy-editing problems have been taken care of. It should be incredibly easy to skim over and fix any minor mistakes. Thanks. Wikidudeman (talk) 12:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ready for proof. There is an issue with one paragraph, as noted on the talk page. Otherwise, should be a fairly straightforward proof. Galena11 23:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Science and technology in Iran (edit talk links history)
    I have built up this article from scratch over the last two years. It is now very comprehensive. However it needs copyediting for neutrality, style and also grammar. Any helps will be very much appreciated. Thanks. Sangak 16:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I made many minor changes from top to bottom and posted suggestions about expanding the lead and converting the embedded external web links to in-line citations. Another eye would help. Finetooth 06:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Lethbridge (edit talk links history) [Added: 03:02, 20 October 2007 (UTC)]
    Many MOS suggestions have been brought up and addressed. An editor recently brought up that the article is a poor read: choppy, several vague statements, etc. Would love having several people taking a look to make this article a more engaging read. Thanks a bunch! Kmsiever 03:02, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Copyedit complete. Should be an easy proofread. Finetooth 03:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Turkish language (edit talk links history)
    Article is currently FAC. Article has since made it into FA. A copy edit would still be appreciated. Free smyrnan 21:14, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Article moved to this section as it is no longer an FAC. Epbr123 16:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    C/E complete and ready for proof. See talk page for notes. Galena11 14:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Matvey Kazakov (edit talk links history)
    Up to Shadow of Bazhenov. "Neoclassical architect" sounds better to my ears than "Neoclassicist architect". Is this correct?BuddingJournalist 08:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    'neoclassical' refers to 18th century French architects like Soufflot and theorists like Laugier and Perrault as well as other architects influenced by them (i.e. Schinkel in Germany).--Agnaramasi 20:49, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Melodifestivalen (edit talk links history)
    — A failed FA candidate. I think it's close to FA-quality now but a fresh pair of eyes would do the world of good. Thanks. Chwech | hum-dee-hum-hum 22:17, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oil shale extraction (edit talk links history)
    The intention is to nominate this article for GAC and afterward for FAC. However, before doing this, some copy-editing should be done. Particulaerly the following things need attention:
    Copyedit done....though it's a technical subject, i did the best i could....ready for proofread Gprince007 15:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Nikolai Fyodorovich Vatutin (edit talk links history)
    --Dalobuca 23:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Copyedit completed. Concerns have been left at the talk page.Gprince007 15:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Hirakud Dam (edit talk links history) Copy-edited for grammar and encyclopedic structuring/language. It requires proofreading and maybe some more editing, so I left the copy-edit template on. --Zdilli 17:17, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ready for proof. Galena11 22:58, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Mahmud II (edit talk links history) Copy edited for grammar, a clearer tone, and tighter language. I removed the copy editing template, but it might use some more changes with someone more familiar with writing in the encyclopedic tone. Needs proofreading either way.--Zdilli 23:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Ready for proof. Galena11 23:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Goldfrapp (edit talk links history) copyedit appears to have been completed by User:Cricketgirl 22:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC). Happy‑melon 19:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Alone in Love (edit talk links history) Copy-edited for grammar and a tighter language. --Zdilli (talk) 23:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proofread complete


Archives

  1. Current Month
  2. October 2007
  3. September 2007
  4. August 2007
  5. July 2007
  6. June 2007
  7. May 2007
  1. Select any article that you did not copyedit from the "Ready for final proofread" section. Edit as necessary and note what changed (e.g., grammar, added ref tag) in the edit summary.
  2. Remove the copyedit template, if it hasn't been already (this will take the article off of the "Articles Needing Copyedit" backlog).
  3. Edit the copy-editor's comment on the discussion page to list your name as a proofreader (detailed instructions here).
  4. Move the article to the bottom of this section, add {{done}} on a new line, and make any appropriate notes.
  5. Archive any article that was proofread more than one week ago.

Copyedit and/or proofread denied

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_League_of_Copyeditors/proofreading&oldid=185328024"