Requested articles Home | Talk | Backlog Drive | Red link Blitzes | How to create | Requested Article creations of the month | Members | Coordinators | Newsletters | Mailing list |
Index
|
|
Wikipedia Primary School: second call for Articles!
Hi everybody, as part of the content phase of the Wikipedia Primary School project, I would like to propose the creation of two articles ! The Wikipedia Primary School research project focuses on the South African primary school curriculum: the involved teams have selected a list of 100+ relevant articles, some of which will undergo review (or creation) by Wikipedias, scholars/experts, or journals. So the articles we'd like to suggest for creation are:
Please see the project pages for more information and instructions, and thanks in advance for your invaluable help. Anthere (talk)
IRC
Just as a heads up, I've created a new IRC chat room to facilitate discussion among volunteers who are active in the requested article process. You can join it at #wikipedia-en-ra connect. ~ Matthewrbowker Drop me a note 05:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Incorrect and misleading information about rquesting articles
As mentioned above, I started doing a purge of the companies section.
While doing it, I noticed the heading on the page wikipedia:requested articles, which says that t Your best bet to get an article created is to write it yourself using the Articles for Creation process.
This is quite misleading. Almost all requests in companies and probably many other sections are from COI editors. It is emphatically not a good idea for a COI editor to attempt to write an article through AfC--at least, it is inadvisable with respect to companies. The majority of such drafts are declined there, and many of the ones that do make it into mainspace get deleted. The only good way to get an article about oneself or one's company or one's work, is to wait until it becomes so well known that a volunteeer editor will want to write about it.
And there needs to be a warning about WP:COPI and WP:PAID, such as: "If you have conflict of interest, you a must declare the connection. Please see our rules on Conflict of Interest . If you are writing this for pay or as a staff member of the organization, see also WP:PAID for the necessary disclosures. If you hire someone else to write the article, unless they make the appropriate declarations, the article will almost certainly be deleted. "
I can make the change, but I cannot figure out just where the text is located. DGG ( talk ) 04:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- I boldly updated it a few days ago. Feel free to adjust. It is located at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Header. Keep in mind that not all topics are businesses, this is the header for all the topics and categories, so I chose to focus the message on notability rather than COI. When folks click on the "Click here to write an article yourself" link, they are taken to the article wizard, and one of the questions/steps is "are you a paid editor / do you have a COI?", and there is a special set of instructions for those folks about disclosing, so in my opinion we don't need to give this a lot of weight in the header. P.S. Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies doesn't mention COI either. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
All instructions for people writing in draft space need to mention COI. It affects all bios in all fields, and all organizations commercial or otherwise, all works of art, all music, all products, everything relating to entertainment or education,, and most politics. I'll gradually check them all and I'll ask for some more help if needed. This was a very minor concern in 2001, and just becoming important when I joined in 2006; now in 2022 it's overwhelming our capacity to deal with them. DGG ( talk ) 07:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- What can really be done about it though? Our COI guideline basically says that AFC is where COI editors should make their articles. WP:COIEDIT:
you should put new articles through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process instead of creating them directly
. For this reason, I think we should be careful and hesitant to do anything to discourage COI editors from using AFC. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:33, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
I've boldly modified the wording here per this conversation and my own thoughts on the edit. A note that RA is not a guaranteed article creation is very worth leaving -- the fact Wikipedia is written by admittedly-fickle volunteers is both integral and not widely known. Putting a huge bold "go away and use AfC instead" is at best meaningless and at worst gets you every hopeless case at RA/Companies flooding AfC instead. Vaticidalprophet 09:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.
)
and turns it into something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)