User talk:SandyGeorgia/sandbox9

User talk:SandyGeorgia/sandbox9/archive 1

A note to all the courageous who enter here

My editing and typing will drive you nuts :) See User talk:SandyGeorgia/arch112#I had to take action regarding my back injury, frequent typos and edit conflicts, and piecemeal editing, with my apologies in advance. I edit from an iPad as much as I can, to avoid sitting at a real computer for extended periods. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:23, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To do

Message to be used for notifying article talk via mass message sender: Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 1/article talk notice
Message to be used for notifying DC GA reviewers Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 1/user talk notice
Message to be used for mass GAR template: Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 1/GAR notice
Sort the timing issues.
Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Appomattox Court House National Historical Park/1 and similar
SDZeroBot moved from 223 to 222 and dropped the article.

Petscan got it: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=23784352

Problem

User:Iazyges the way User:Iazyges/Doug GA Rewrite Claims is being used now is going to get us cross-wise and leave us with more work. Editors are not clearly indicating there if they plan to open an individual GAR, which is what we need to know for mass delisting implementation. Can you add a note or something to the top of that list? We will need to set up a new list as a GA subpage, numbered, and use it only to indicate yea or nay on individual GAR intent. To those pinged, please have a look at User:SandyGeorgia/sandbox9 as we figure out where to put this in a GA subpage. @Epicgenius, XOR'easter, Hog Farm, and JPxG: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The one I looked at I've sent to GAR for comprehensiveness/weighting issues, which is also something we should be keeping in mind, especially given Talk:Cone Mills Corporation/GA2, Talk:Cone Mills Corporation/GA3, and Talk:Cone Mills Corporation/GA4. Hog Farm _Talk 15:27, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: Added the note; Unfortunately, due to the small scale of interest and general mess, I get the feeling it might be more practical to just run the GAR on every article and let people re-run the few they want. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 16:42, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Iazyges I don't believe we can do that now, because that would probably fly against the consensus in the way it was worded at the AN. If you want, I will generate a new alphabetical and numbered list for the GAN Review Tool, and then before the mass delist run, we can remove any flagged at your user page ?? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia:Oh, I worded that poorly, I agree we can't do that now, just saying it has become more practical. I think your list is a good idea. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 16:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll work up the new list, which we will later cross-reference with yours. Maybe at yours you could work on querying each individual editor who has posted there as to whether they are only entering comments, or really intend to launch an individual GAR. I had only entered comments. What the script needs is a definitive list of articles that will not see an individual GAR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:51, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ready for review

The content is my sandbox is ready for review by fresh eyes. I don't want to move it into GA space until several have reviewed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:41, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MER-C, Premeditated Chaos, and Moneytrees:, if you want to have a look, I'm at a stopping place. I think I'm close enough to be ready to move it to the GA subpage tomorrow (Wednesday). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review by MER-C

I recommend not naming Doug Coldwell in page names. There are other people named Doug Coldwell, and Doug Coldwell could just be a pseudonym.
"If you find any of the above, please start a talk page discussion" - if it's a copyvio, just remove it and then open the discussion. I think the other issues also fall in the "just remove it" category. See point immediately below.
The templates {{subst:CCI}}, {{subst:CCId}}, and {{subst:cclean}} can be used on talk pages to denote presumptive removal/stubbing, presumptive deletion, and copyvio removal respectively (the latter can also be used in combined copyvio and presumptive removals).
If a copyvio is material to the content of the page, request revision deletion using {{copyvio-revdel}} after removing the copyvio. I don't use revdel on presumptive removals.
If a page cannot be salvaged or presumptive deletion is expedient, replace its entire content with {{subst:copyvio}} and follow the instructions on that template to list the page at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. The page will likely be deleted after a week if it is not rewritten.

Initial thoughts, potentially more later. MER-C 18:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and the questionable content must not be copied to the talk page or GAR page when opening/during any discussion. We all know we shouldn't, but we can't easily control who works on this. I think that is all. MER-C 19:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Got it ... thax, MER-C ... I am not home, iPad typing from Hotspot, so will get on these as soon as I'm home. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:04, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hog Farm see the talk page templates listed above by MER-C ... I think one of those is needed at Talk:Appomattox Court House National Historical Park. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:07, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I think I might be able to save one or two of the other Appomattox ones, but I can't make any promises. Hog Farm _Talk 02:09, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]