Wikipedia:Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fenice (talk | contribs) at 08:42, 31 December 2005 (→[[Frog]] (3 votes, stays until [[January 3]], [[2006]]): support). 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
Shortcut

The Article Improvement Drive is a weekly collaboration to improve non-stub articles to featured article status. (For stub articles or topics with no articles, see Collaborations of the week.)

/History - For past winners.
/Removed - For removed nominations.



Articles to be improved can be nominated by registered users in the "nominations" section below, with an explanation of what work is needed. Any and all articles may be nominated except:

Each Sunday, the article with the most support votes is chosen. Opposing votes are not counted; see approval voting. You can vote for as many articles as you like. Articles need three votes per week to stay on the list.

Collaborations
Articles
Science and technology
Miscellaneous

Nominations

The next project article is to be selected on Sunday January 1, 2006. 18.00 GMT

Please add new nominations at the bottom of the page.

Also, please do us all a favour: When you vote, update the vote count in the subhead at the same time. If you're feeling generous, check to see if you've put it over the "stays until" margin and update that line too, if needed.

Thomas Edison (17 votes, stays until January 10, 2006)

Nominated November 30, 2005; needs at least 18 votes by January 10, 2006
Support
  1. TrafficBenBoy TrafficBenBoy 07:59, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Behun 22:36, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. MyNameIsNotBob 20:05, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Carolaman 20:18, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Fallout boy 07:06, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Durova 18:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Ashibaka tock 06:12, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Jaranda wat's sup 22:34, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. CollieBreath 03:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. RexNL 02:12, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  11. DSYoungEsq 16:52, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Fenice 08:05, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  13. Waltwe 17:10, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  14. ragesoss 08:32, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Hurricanehink 20:19, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  16. Steven 04:27, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Rayc 04:30, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

History of the world (14 votes, stays until January 11, 2006)

Nominated December 8, 2005; needs at least 15 votes by January 11, 2006
Support
  1. Daanschr 13:22, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Tarret 23:21, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. PepperIT 11:16, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Singkong2005 11:14, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. ---- Astrokey44|talk 11:21, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Scoo 14:12, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Dan M 23:44, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. RCSB 15:13, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Fenice 22:38, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Cuivienen 03:07, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Mac Davis 12:02, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Wackymacs 20:27, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  13. --Hahaandy1 23:07, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Noneloud 05:44, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • This article lacks a central idea. The headline texts are pointless. I'm trying to rewrite on my own, but i don't like to delete texts that are no better then mine. My idea is to give atention to the present debate among sociologists and historians on why Europe had the industrial revolution and colonized the world. Also i like to have more focus on the history of important civilization advances. That is why i created headlines like: hunter-gatherers, agriculture, state, city and trade. I like to add religion, capitalism, industrialism, democracy versus other kinds of governments. A lot to debate about.--Daanschr 13:22, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article turns out to be the last 0.0001% of the history of the world... :) ---- — RJH 22:34, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Argh, I can see another Fernand Braudel coming along ;) Scoo 14:12, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article is very bad. I'm not surprised that it can't be found on Google. It reads like a children's encylcopedia of the 1970's. It isn't representative of modern scholarly opinion. See Talk:History of the World ('Rise of Europe'). RCSB 15:13, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

John Seigenthaler Sr. (12 votes, stays until January 12, 2006)

Nominated December 8, 2005; needs at least 15 votes by January 12, 2006
Support
  1. Let's redeem Wikipedia by turning this into a Featured Article! Kaldari 15:36, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Wackymacs 15:39, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Ed 17:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Gflores Talk 20:55, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Larsinio 22:22, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Newguineafan 01:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Trevor MacInnis (Talk | Contribs) 04:53, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 04:50, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Pepsidrinka 15:46, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Dvyost 17:05, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  11.  — MATHWIZ2020 TALK | CONTRIBS 20:57, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  12. zenohockey 05:09, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • It'll make him happy since he complained about Wikipedia (and had a right to!) — Wackymacs 15:39, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Err... I doubt that fixing this article will redeem wikipedia in the eyes of the critics. Although it may mollify J.S. slightly. :) — RJH 22:31, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm sick of Wikipedia being attacked...I hope an Article Improvement Drive helps!! -Newguineafan 01:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Half of me says "this is a great idea! what an amusing and clever way to show the reason Wikipedia is a project with so much potential despite its brief setbacks!", and half of me says "this is a terrible idea! it shows a profound pro-Wiki bias that we would go to such efforts to cover our own tracks and put a higher priority on "atoning" and making ourselves look good than on focusing on articles on truly major and vitally important topics that are much more neglected than this article currently is!" So, I'm on the fence on this one.
  • Overall, my thought is: anyone who cares enough about Wikipedia's public image should feel free to work on improving this article, but it shouldn't be one of the weekly article improvement drives; there are too many other topics that are hundreds of times more important for us to spend time on, and in any case going to such lengths for Wikipedia's public image could easily backfire by bringing even more attention to what is really a pretty trivial event that the media blew far out of proportion. In 10 years, it will barely be worthy of a section, much less a distinct article; which is not to say that having coverage of it now is a bad thing, just that it's not something for the Article Improvement Drive.
  • There are entire civilizations and spans of millennia, people and ideas that have changed the history of mankind forever, fundamental scientific and mathematical principles that require good coverage to gain any understanding of our very universe and of existence itself, all with articles so poor that if they appeared in any printed work that work would be laughed off the market forever and become useful only as a party gag. There are thousands of such topics for us to worry about, and we go for this article just because some vandal happened to play around with it? What a victory for vandalism that would be! "Man, let's keep this up and see if we can start another news controversy and gain even more influence over Wikipedia's inner workings..." It's just not worth all this trouble. We're an encyclopedia, not a self-image-obsessed media whore, remember?
  • On the other hand, it is a neat idea. So, I say go for it on an individual level; just don't make it some big community quest using the AID. -Silence 08:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • I do feel sympathetic to what you are saying, however, at this particular moment in time Wikipedia and the Wikipedia community have egg on their face. If we can work together to redeem Wikipedia in the eyes of the public (even in a rather shallow and media-centric way) that may have a more beneficial long-term effect than working on any other particular article, no matter how fundamentally important it is. If no one takes Wikipedia seriously anyway, what good will it do to have a great article on History of the World? Kaldari 22:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Which is exactly why this collaboration is a terrible idea. Wikipedia will never be able to be taken seriously if it focuses on its self-image more than on its content. Plus, in fact, the current article on John Seigenthaler Sr. is already very good! Bringing it up to Featured Article quality is completely unnecessary, and amounts to a media stunt ("Hey! Look, media! That article that started this controversy is really good now! See? We really are awesome! ... Be our friends?"). Nothing more, nothing less. Wikipedia should strive to improve its good image by improving the actual content of its vitally-imporatnt articles, not by bowing to the demands of media muckrakers. That's where we are truly in danger of losing our credibility: in the thousands of articles on Wikipedia that are far worse than they should be considering the importance of the subject matter. Wikipedia is already far too fixated on its self-image as-is, leading to a great degradation in actual article quality; more of our Featured Articles look very pretty, but glaring flaws and silly errors are inevitable in just about all of them. Our encyclopedia content should be, now and forever, our number-one concern and focus in "Article Improvement Drive"—we are an encyclopedia, not a public relations firm. -Silence 07:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's thinking like that that causes the horrible hair-styling of politicians today. Content/ideas isn't everything. Image is important for reputation, which counts for something if you want anyone to listen to you or try out your encyclopedia. Otherwise you just end up with those who are wise enough to realize that image isn't everything, which isn't a lot of people. --Schwael 15:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Um? You don't think politicians are superficial enough? You think they're too concerned with truly important issues and with doing a good job, and not enough with just appealing to the media with cheap publicity stunts and "hairstyles"? You're an extremely strange person. Unusually for me, that's not entirely a compliment in this case. I'd rather have an extremely unpopular encyclopedia that's amazingly useful and has lots of great content, than a hugely popular encyclopedia with minimal content and usefulness. Popularity is a means, not an end, and in this case actually working on the enyclopedia itself and its countless neglected vital topics is much more important than sucking up to the media. To continue your metaphor: getting a haircut's all well and good, and a shave probably wouldn't hurt either, but considering that Wikipedia has lung cancer, AIDS, syphillus, and leprosy right now, I think we should handle the major surgery issues first, and worry about the rest down the line (or do it on outside of the "Article Improvement Drive" field, which is specifically designed to improve important Wikipedia articles for the sake of Wikipedia's content, not just for the sake of its appearance). -Silence 21:45, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Still, media is one of Wikipedia's major recruitment venues. Blows to our image such as the Seigenthaler case might drive away knowledgeable would-be-editors. Anyway, this article is already excellent, and should not take the AID spot from an article that needs it desperately. --Imperialles 15:06, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Meditation (6 votes, stays until January 3, 2006)

Nominated December 14, 2005; needs at least 9 votes by January 3, 2006
Support
  1. Ashibaka tock 06:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. cohesion★talk 03:08, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Fenice 12:56, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Csbodine 17:00, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Melaen 18:34, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Luis Dantas 18:59, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • This is an extensive and important topic, it looks like the core bit is well-written but some of it is an ad-hoc mess. This would make a nice featured article with just a little work. Ashibaka tock 06:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Black Consciousness Movement (6 votes, stays until January 3, 2006)

Nominated December 14, 2005; needs at least 9 votes by January 3, 2006
Support
  1. Harro5 11:25, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Banes 11:51, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Revolución (talk) 04:45, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Dvyost 17:05, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Fenice 07:22, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Hurricane Katrina (24 votes, stays until 18 February 2006)

Nominated 15 December 2005; needs at least 27 votes by 18 February 2006
Support
  1. --Revolución (talk) 18:21, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Walkerma 18:30, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. ZeWrestler Talk 17:28, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. cohesion★talk 03:07, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 03:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. tdempsey 03:31, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. NSLE (T+C+CVU) 04:02, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. --AySz88^-^ 16:49, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. --Jaranda wat's sup 01:16, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Harro5 21:01, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  11. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 04:51, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Muffuletta 14:44, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  13. --CFIF 15:09, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Dvyost 17:03, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Jonatanj 17:26, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  16. RattleMan 09:03, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  17. --Ajm81 08:44, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Cuivienen 17:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Mac Davis ญƛ. 12:09, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Hurricanehink 20:18, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Cyde Weys votetalk 20:53, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  22. Sarsaparilla39 00:47, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  23. CrazyC83 04:00, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  24. Steven 04:27, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Comments

Asteroid deflection strategies (9 votes, stays until January 12, 2006)

Nominated December 16, 2005; needs at least 12 votes by January 12, 2006
Support
  1. Fangz 10:13, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. DerHerrMigo 22:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Moonstone 18:08, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Fenice 19:12, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. User:AlMac|(talk) 06:38, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Aumakua 07:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Mac Davis ญƛ. 12:07, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Silence 04:06, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Rayc 04:28, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Very important topic, with big media resonance. Solid, uncontroversial, and interesting topic, with lots of information available on it and strong connections to many other articles. Reorganise, expand, and add a few images, and it could be wonderful. --Fangz 10:13, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Really needs some polishing-up, though. Also needed: more WP-links going to the page and/or a more intuitive name (how about 'Asteroid deflection'?). Nobody types in 'asteroid deflection strategies'! DerHerrMigo 22:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article looks to me like it is a mild improvement over a stub, with some basics there about the problem, but not a lot about possible solutions. We live in a world today, where we have the scientific know how to figure out this stuff, but we do not have the political will to resolve it. To many politicians this topic is a Science Fiction Joke.
  • If it wins, we're going to need to do some crackpot and anti-science fiction damage control.
  • The fate of humankind could rest on this becoming Featured. (Well, probably not. But it's an interesting topic anyway.) -Silence 04:06, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sofia (8 votes, stays until January 8, 2006)

Nominated December 18, 2005; needs at least 9 votes by January 8, 2006
Support
  1. File:Bulgaria flag large.png → Тодор Божинов / Todor Bozhinov → Talk 14:53, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. -Estrellador* 18:17, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Soul assassin 10:10, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Wackymacs 12:37, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Nightstallion ✉ 15:04, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Witty lama 06:52, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. NeoJustin 03:11, December 29, 2005 (UTC)
  8. Fenice 08:41, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • This is an important Bulgaria-related article, which at the moment is full of unnecessary bad-quality images, poorly written content and... lacking information. A lot of work has to be done on this one, just have a look. File:Bulgaria flag large.png → Тодор Божинов / Todor Bozhinov → Talk 14:57, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although in my opinion every capital city should eventually become a featured article, I think that Sofia may require different skills to the others on this page. The Bulgarian edition is already a featured article, and I think that with some translation work the English one could be brought up to a similar level. However, the other candidates would seem to have to be improved from scratch.

Architecture of Africa (8 votes, stays until January 8, 2006)

Nominated December 18, 2005; needs at least 9 votes by January 8, 2006
Support
  1. --Revolución (talk) 22:02, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. -Silence 13:36, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. -Moonstone 18:09, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Ezeu 15:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Dvyost 17:03, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  6. *drew 09:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Warofdreams talk 02:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Fenice 08:42, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • What it needs infinitely more than images is text. Right now, the entire article only discusses three or four countries (Zimbabwe in particular), all of them very briefly. There's so little raw information in this article that there isn't any room for more than one or two images more, as the article currently stands. What it needs most is expansion, expansion, expansion. -Silence 16:21, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Frog (4 votes, stays until January 3, 2006)

Nominated December 20, 2005; needs at least 6 votes by January 3, 2006
Support
  1. liquidGhoul 13:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Moonstone 18:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. CloudNine 15:56, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Fenice 08:42, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • A frog article is a necessity in an encyclopaedia, and this is such a horrible article. I have cleaned it up considerably, but the article needs both considerable expansion and more cleaning. --liquidGhoul 13:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great Leap Forward (3 votes, stays until 4 January 2006)

Nominated December 21, 2005; needs at least 6 votes by 4 January, 2006
Support
  1. Estrellador* 21:30, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. naryathegreat | (talk) 02:36, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Stevecov 16:49, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Contact lens (10 votes, stays until January 23, 2006)

Nominated December 27, 2005; needs at least 12 votes by January 23, 2006
Support
  1. Fenice 08:10, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Stevecov 15:05, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Melaen 18:31, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Waltwe 22:26, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. NeoJustin 03:10, December 29, 2005 (UTC)
  6. AED 07:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Natebw 10:21, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Cuivienen 03:10, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Rafael Sepulveda 08:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Kingpomba 09:45, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Prison farm (1 vote, stays until January 2, 2006)

Nominated December 27, 2005; needs at least 3 votes by January 2, 2006


Support
  1. Waltwe 12:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments


Ego, superego, and id (3 votes, stays until January 9, 2006)

Nominated 27 December, 2005; needs at least 6 votes by January 9, [[2006])
Support
  1. Melaen 19:04, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Fenice 19:15, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Rampart 20:12, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Veterinary medicine (3 votes, stays until January 10, 2006)

Nominated December 28, 2005; needs at least 6 votes by January 10, 2006
Support
  1. Tuf-Kat 05:13, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. AED 07:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Mac Davis ญƛ. 12:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Roma people (4 votes, stays until January 11, 2006)

Nominated December 29, 2005; needs at least 6 votes by January 11, 2006
Support
  1. Dijxtra 11:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Fenice 12:45, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Waltwe 22:25, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Wackymacs 20:30, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Article in really poor condition, needs copyediting, needs a lot of work on citing sources as topic is controversial. There are (probably) no Roma nationals on Wikipedia so this article would benefit from collaboration of people skilled in googleing info out. Let's help Roma people get good and NPOVed encyclopedia entry. --Dijxtra 11:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Templates

  • {{AIDnom}}, please place this notice on the talk page of nominated article
  • {{IDRIVEcur}}, a notice for current collaborations
  • {{subst:AIDvoter}}, a notice for people who voted for this week's winning article.
  • {{IDRIVEtopic}}, a banner to announce the current topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Article_Collaboration_and_Improvement_Drive&oldid=33359490"