Wikipedia:One featured article per quarter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortcut: WP:1FAPQ

One featured article per quarter is a list of Wikipedians who have informally agreed to attempt to bring one article to featured article standard every quarter (3 months). Beyond the obvious goal of improving the quality of Wikipedia entries, the purpose of this list is twofold: to provide a means of mutual reinforcement and friendly competition; and to provide a centralized talk discussion solely devoted to the content and structure of featured articles.

The talk page here is meant to address specific difficulties editors have when attempting to bring an article to standard (a picture or scientific paper that is needed, for example). If you have a query, post it here

Contents 1 Increasing FA throughput 2 The List 2.1 Fourth quarter 2006 2.2 First quarter 2007 3 Project resources 4 Considerations

[edit] Increasing FA throughput

At present, Wikipedia:featured article candidates produces about one featured article per day (successful candidacies less former featured articles). Unlike other Wikipedia processes, the throughput on FAC has increased little over much of 2005 and 2006. Article creation itself, by contrast, continues to increase in volume; thus, the % of Wikipedia articles which are featured has dropped from 0.11% to 0.08% in a little over a year.

One stated goal is to reach 100 000 featured articles, within the range of traditional encyclopedias such as Britannica. At the current approximate rate of one per day, it will take three centuries to reach 100 000k. One hundred per day would be required to reach the goal in three years.

Incremental goals are needed if throughput is ever going to increase by orders of magnitude. If this page produces 100 extra FAs per quarter, it would constitute a rough doubling of the current rate. This is an achievable initial goal.

[edit] The List

Wikipedians are meant to sign up from quarter-to-quarter. The only requirement is that editors list the article they plan to bring to standard when signing for a given period. This is to encourage people to think through whether they have time for a FA and what subject they are capable of handling. The quarter after current will be listed here; if it's late in the three-month period or more time is required, articles may be listed under the second section.

When listing, provide a one or two sentence description of the state of the article and any help required. Editors should not only list the article they plan to work on, but scan others to see if they can provide any help.

[edit] Fourth quarter 2006

1. Barnard's star; Substantial work has already been done but I need someone to double check the numbers. Can't find any pics. Marskell 14:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

   I have Uploaded an image and included it in the article. Should we nominate it for featured article?-- ¢² Connor K.   16:15, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

2. Battle of Ceresole Mostly done, still working on copyediting and minor fixes. Help with finding a better map of the Piedmont would be very appreciated! Kirill Lokshin 15:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC) Has been promoted to FA. Kirill Lokshin 05:32, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
3. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and/or World Trade Center - just added a history section to PANYNJ, more work to do, working from other sources. The idea is to get a set of articles relating to the September 11, 2001 attacks up to featured status, since these are among the most viewed articles. [1] --Aude (talk) 15:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
4. Kroger Babb. It's about 80% there, it needs text cleanup, some image help, and redlink fixes, but I think it's almost there. --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

   Nominated. Wish me luck! --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:20, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

5. Medieval cuisine – There's already plenty of material and pics and good sources seem quite abundant. There's still a lot to be included, such as the various regions and section on dietetics, fasting and cooking methods. Illustrations from the Early and High Middle Ages would be nice, but might be difficult to find. But considering how enjoyable writing this article has been so far, it should be no problem to get it done before Christmas. / Peter ^Isotalo 17:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
6. Ryan Leaf was working on this article til I ran out of time, close to an FA, needs a free image, some extra sources, and a copyedit, which I would work on this weekend. It's a WP:GA Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 22:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
7. Abu Nidal and Martin Amis. These are hopes more than plans, I should add. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
8. Józef Piłsudski and History of Solidarity. Józef... needs only some NPOVing, History... more inlince citations. I would like to see them FAed this year.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  22:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
9. DuMont Television Network is not even a Good Article yet, but I plan to get it up to FA by the end of the year. I'm working on adding references and small details, and the biglist of former affiliates was recently moved to a new page. Firsfron of Ronchester 07:41, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
10. Platypus was a former featured article which I'm slowly fixing up, and I hope to get that and Richard Feynmann back up to FA standard by the end of the year, plus I'm going to have a go at horseshoe as a bit of a challenge. I know that's three but I thought I'd let you know what I'm working on. Yomangani^talk 11:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
11. Geology of the Lassen volcanic area - Just needs a lead section and copyedit before it goes to PR and then FAC. Still working... --mav 12:46, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
12. Jim Elliot - still needs expansion, but I'm working on it. Images are going to be a problem. --Spangineer^es (háblame) 00:23, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
13. Music of Italy (current nom) and Music of the Lesser Antilles hopefully very soon, after that I'm aiming for one more, probably music history of the United States Tuf-Kat 02:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
14. Clea Rose - nearly done, just needs a thorough copyedit and a couple more references Rebecca 09:52, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
15. Mount Tambora - the article has covered all major things needed to be included with reliable sources. I've asked PR and it's still there for more suggestions. The article also needs some copyediting for better and briliant prose, as I'm lack of this skill. Thanks for any helps in advance. — Indon (reply) — 11:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

    It's on FAC. Wish me luck! ;-) — Indon (reply) — 16:17, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

16. Charles Atangana - Article about a Cameroonian leader from the colonial era. Currently on peer review. I'll probably leave it up there for another few days before making the move to FAC. Any suggestions on ways to improve the article are greatly appreciated. — BrianSmithson 01:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Currently on FAC. — BrianSmithson 22:57, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First quarter 2007

1. Federal Bureau of Investigation - Have been working with User:Bugs5382 on this. Have numerous reference materials to work from. --Aude (talk) 15:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
2. New York City Police Department - Perhaps instead of the FBI article, I might get to this one first. Also have numerous reference materials to work from. This one suffers from NPOV problems, and apparently some edits are coming from the NYPD itself. With quality research and sourcing, these issues can be addressed and NPOV resolved. --Aude (talk) 15:35, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
3. Toy - When I found it yesterday it was messy, disorganized, with lousy spelling and grammar. I've re-arranged the sections and images and cleaned up some of the unreadable spelling and grammar. It needs more, and better quality references, some sections need expansion, and it needs to reflect a broader world-view. I hope to be able to submit it to peer review by December or January. It might be FA quality by March. Maybe. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 15:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
4. Battle of Ravenna (1512) - will need major expansion from a variety of additional sources, footnoting, illustration, maps, etc. Kirill Lokshin 16:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
5. Battle of Pavia - will need major expansion from a variety of additional sources, illustration, maps, etc. Kirill Lokshin 16:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
6. Al-Manar - mostly expansion; the main problem is a lack of sources, there only seems to be one book about the history of the station; I may need help from someone who speaks Arabic.--Carabinieri^T_T^a_a^l_l^k_k 21:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
7. Transportation in Mexico City - Needs a massive expansion, but I already have an outline ready. It will take me some time to gather up all the sources and write all the necessary sub-articles firs, though. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 09:41, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
8. Geyser, another candidate from the former FA archives. I haven't started looking for sources for this yet, but I'm sure they are out there. Yomangani^talk 11:43, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
9. Puerto Rican Parrot Slowly working on it. Must get more info on behavior and anatomy. Joelito (talk) 21:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
10. Common Coquí Slowly expanding also. Getting my hands on some peer reviewed journals and books. Joelito (talk) 20:19, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
11. Transperth Trains, a metro-like system that can be expanded extensively with tons of potential. - Mailer Diablo 17:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
12. Olive Zakharov and Susan Ryan. The first is a long-term project, with the vast bulk of the content written, but needing references, a good copyedit, and some solid further research. The second needs to be started from scratch, but I've got some new resources to make a very good article of it. Rebecca 09:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
13. Space exploration. This is on the vital topics list and I'd like to try it next. The writing needs a major overhaul, first off. Marskell 12:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
14. R.E.M. - It's actually not too far off, factually. I own four books to use, and there's more than enough in the way of magazine info to pull from, so this shouldn't be horribly difficult. --badlydrawnjeff talk 00:42, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
15. Tupac Shakur, again close to an WP:FA but many disputes, will work on this when I get the time. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 02:17, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
16. Religion in Indonesia, currently haven't got GA, but I am considering of nominating it. The amount of information is pretty good, I reckon. Cheers -- Imoeng 11:32, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
17. Minstrel show - I think the article is already in really good shape and would probably pass FAC if I nominated it, but I've done some more research, and the article isn't quite comprehensive enough for my tastes. It's a bit overlong, so I'm going to have to split out some sections per WP:SS (most likely Music of blackface minstrelsy and possibly History of blackface minstrelsy or Black minstrelsy). It would be nice to have other opinions on what to split of and what to keep. — BrianSmithson 01:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
18. Tropical cyclone - It's a biggie, but it already is in good shape, and it needs a bit of copyediting and research to finish it off to FA status. Titoxd^(?!?) 04:10, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project resources

Even if you don't plan to write a featured article, you may be able to help the "One featured article per quarter" project. Featured article collaborators often desire independent reviewers to ensure that their articles meet Wikipedia style guidelines, are properly sourced, and are well written. If editors can contact you to request your input or assistance, list yourself below, mentioning the type of help you're able to provide. (The resources listed here are offered only within the scope of this project. Article reviewers are always needed, in general, at Peer Review.)

Copy-editing

• ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 18:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Provision or verification of sources

• ~  ¢² Connor K.   21:55, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Considerations

• This appears to assume that individuals working more or less alone are what drive our best content. What about collaboration? Does this encourage ownership of articles?

This does assume that individual users rather than pairs or teams are the primary FA creators. Massive additions to and restructuring of articles are generally less time-consuming if performed by an individual and then presented to others for critique afterwards. Very clearly, however, users do not own the articles they post here or have any sort of privilege in regards to them. Also, the list itself and discussions on talk are meant to be a form of collaboration: list your own but also see what you can do for others.

• What if the only people who sign up were going to create an FA anyway?

If this merely lists what is going to happen anyway, no harm done. Three months will ideally encourage two things: a regularized target for people who've already produced FAs, and a reasonable goal for people who'd like to try their first.

• Might this actually be a discouraging process if someone signs up and fails?

This is not a contest and there is no "pass/fail." Avoid signing up if you do not genuinely believe you have the time for an article, but don't worry if real life and work intervene.

• I've heard complaints that some people view successful FACs as the only measure of a Wikipedian's contribution. Is this encouraging that bias?

Featured articles are far from the only important contribution Wikipedians make, but this list is meant to further foreground the importance of bringing articles to the FA standards.

• Doesn't "Project resources" duplicate Peer Review?

Peer Review allows editors to comment on articles that range widely in quality, with no guarantee of engaging the nominator. Some editors would like to have a more active collaborative role in creating featured articles, even if they are not the primary contributors. Listing themselves as "resources" offers users the chance to be more engaged in article creation.