CZ:Approval Announcements: Difference between revisions
imported>Nancy Sculerati |
imported>Nancy Sculerati |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Now, about that gallery. The article [[Tux]] had a gallery associated with it, which is an article in the main space that had all the images, as well as some discussion about them. Now this "article" was also nominated for approval - but when it came time to do that- it was noted that everything in this article was essentially already in [[Tux]], and that the editor (Robert Tito) who had put up the approval nomination template ("to approve") had also made note in the discussion that maybe this was better not a separate article. Now, in the case of [[Biology]] there was also a gallery generated. This kind of an "accessory page" is useful for some articles. There is also usefullness to freezing a version and so we went ahead with approval- but ''as'' a gallery, rather than as an article. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] and [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] were instrumental in helping me carry this out, and devising the process. A discussion is on Matt's talk page. | Now, about that gallery. The article [[Tux]] had a gallery associated with it, which is an article in the main space that had all the images, as well as some discussion about them. Now this "article" was also nominated for approval - but when it came time to do that- it was noted that everything in this article was essentially already in [[Tux]], and that the editor (Robert Tito) who had put up the approval nomination template ("to approve") had also made note in the discussion that maybe this was better not a separate article. Now, in the case of [[Biology]] there was also a gallery generated. This kind of an "accessory page" is useful for some articles. There is also usefullness to freezing a version and so we went ahead with approval- but ''as'' a gallery, rather than as an article. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] and [[User:D. Matt Innis|Matt Innis]] were instrumental in helping me carry this out, and devising the process. A discussion is on Matt's talk page. | ||
This brings up the Approval Process, what it means, and how it is carried out. Expect a discussion here on the Approvals notice Board about that in the next days. In | This brings up the [[CZ:Approval_Process|Approval Process]], what it means, and how it is carried out. Expect a discussion here on the Approvals notice Board about that in the next days. In preparation for that review of Approvals- illustrated by actual cases, I would appreciate view points and questions, as well as (sigh) criticisms, to be put on my talk page, so that these can be incorporated. [[User:Nancy Sculerati|Nancy Sculerati]] 12:27, 15 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
==<font size="3" color="660000"> May 10, 2007 </font>== | ==<font size="3" color="660000"> May 10, 2007 </font>== | ||
Revision as of 12:11, 15 May 2007
May 15, 2007
There are newly approved articles to announce, and a new category of article to talk about, as well. That sort of article is a Gallery, and like with most things at Citizendium beta, is still loose in the details. That means - your input is needed.
- The lead article for the Literature Workgroup, Literature has now been approved.
- The Media Workgroup now has its first approved article: Telephone Newspaper.
- Complex number underwent an emergency copyedit, and Prime number was approved in a 1.1 version.
Congratulations are due to all concerned. Everyone of these articles is a real asset to CZ and a fine accomplishment.
Now, about that gallery. The article Tux had a gallery associated with it, which is an article in the main space that had all the images, as well as some discussion about them. Now this "article" was also nominated for approval - but when it came time to do that- it was noted that everything in this article was essentially already in Tux, and that the editor (Robert Tito) who had put up the approval nomination template ("to approve") had also made note in the discussion that maybe this was better not a separate article. Now, in the case of Biology there was also a gallery generated. This kind of an "accessory page" is useful for some articles. There is also usefullness to freezing a version and so we went ahead with approval- but as a gallery, rather than as an article. Chris Day and Matt Innis were instrumental in helping me carry this out, and devising the process. A discussion is on Matt's talk page.
This brings up the Approval Process, what it means, and how it is carried out. Expect a discussion here on the Approvals notice Board about that in the next days. In preparation for that review of Approvals- illustrated by actual cases, I would appreciate view points and questions, as well as (sigh) criticisms, to be put on my talk page, so that these can be incorporated. Nancy Sculerati 12:27, 15 May 2007 (CDT)
May 10, 2007
Spotlight on Developing Articles
- First well developed law article: Concurrent use registration, a specialty topic in trademark law, was developed by its Wikipedia contributor, who brought it here and then made considerable further progress. Is there a lawyer in the house? Or a law professor? This article awaits an editor.
- A history article, Northwest_Passage, is quite nearly complete, quite interesting — and beautifully illustrated, to boot! Who has the expertise to vet this article as editor?
May 8, 2007
- Newly approved articles:
The big news this Tuesday is our 2 newly approved articles: Complex number and Prime number. These are the first mathematics articles ever nominated for approval!
Like the first Biology articles, these articles likely need copyediting and the nominating editors can contact me to effect these.Nancy Sculerati 08:49, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
- Like the first Biology article, there seems to be discussion that a line or two is not accurate, or at least well stated, in one of the articles. Is this a copyedit? No, but if 3 editors can quickly agree to fix it, a version 1.1. of a "glitched' newly approved article can be up within 24 hours.
Congratulations Mathematics Workgroup!
Just as no book was ever published (to my knowlege anyway) without need for an erratum or copyedit (if a reader looked closely enough), these articles are a real accomplishment on the part of co-operative effort to synthesize a good article on the wiki - but, as newly frozen articles are likely to be imperfect.
- Hopefully, editors will soon reach consensus on copyedits, and the workgroup will look over both articles for any outstanding issues to be QUICKLY corrected.
- Other changes, and further development of each article, will - of course- continue on the draft pages and all are welcome to author there.
- Now that the Mathematics group has learned how it's done, we look forward to many more articles from you.
- Articles newly nominated for approval:
In the Literature Workgroup- the lead article: Literature is due for approval on May 10. Discussion and correction is welcome. If no Literature editor removes the template, or asks that the date be extended, approval will occur on May 10.
In the Media Workgroup: Telephone Newspaper is due for approval on May 11.
WHICH version gets approved?
The template for nominating an approved version point to a version, at the same time the draft is modified up until approval. How does the Constabulary know which version to approve? I call on the constabulary to answer here, please. Nancy Sculerati
- Keep in mind that the constable doesn't actually approve articles, only editors may do this. The constable only performs the mechanics of protecting the pages and setting up the draft versions. When the editor points to a version on the ToApprove template, that is the version that the constable performs the mechanics of approval and protects. Any edits made after the version that the editor pointed to will only be included in the new Draft version, not the Approved version. So technically, once an editor nominates a version for approval, authors may continue to work without being part of the approval process. Keep in mind that the approving editor (or editors) may update the version at any time before the "date to be approved" to include those new changes. So, when the the date of approval arrives, the constable performs the mechanics upon the version that the ToApprove template is pointing to on that day. --Matt Innis (Talk) 14:06, 8 May 2007 (CDT)
What's the answer, then? It depends on the specific article and on communication between the nominating editor(s) and the constable approving the version - that's the answer. For the upcoming Literature article, for example, e-mails to the editor that nominated the article for approval may resolve any controversy over which version. Unless the template is changed to point to a new version,- or removed altogether by an editor in that workgroup-, when the approval date comes, it is the version pointed to by the template that the constable will approve. What if new incorporations in the draft would make it a better article? Well, then the article can be approved again- a new version, using the same rules that produced the first approval. Generally, however, if modifications between approved versions are minor, and the nominating editor(s) ask the constable for a short approval time between nomination and approval (like 24 hours) that will be granted.Nancy Sculerati
May 3, 2007
This Thursday we'd like to focus on developing articles that require editors' and authors' attention.
The lead article in the Literature Workgroup is coming along beautifully. Are there Literature editors out there who have not yet applied for Editorship? Granted, it's a steep hurdle for qualifications - but if you have a Ph D in Literature or related fields, please e-mail personnel@citizendium.org. This is an important article that is on the verge of blossoming. Eyes wanted.
All interested editors, authors and readers, please see Literature.
- UPDATE: Now approved.
New medium of the last "turn of the century": Telephone Newspaper
It's an obscure topic, true- but a fascinating one! Telephone Newspaper is a window into the past development of journalism in electronic media - albeit very low voltage electronic media. Is this article properly classified as to workgoup? It certainly seems that nomination for approval should be the next step by the editor(s) who can perform due diligence and verify accuracy. Will it languish, fully formed, for want of approval?
Where is its nominating editor?
Telephone Newspaper awaits you!
- UPDATE: Now approved.
Here's one we have the editors for; getting this article into shape for approval nomination requires meeting a different sort of challenge. This article is inter-disciplinary to its core, at least among the sciences, including social sciences, and — it's in the workgroup — philosophy, too.
- Can there be a swarm of authors and editors that buzz this one into high polish?
- Or will it continue its tradition of being one of Citizendium's magnets for contention ?
Scientific method is developed, and has been developing — as well as been deconstructed — for a very long time.
Now is the time for all good men and women to review:
- Articles newly nominated for approval:
Two mathematics articles are now up for approval: Complex number and Prime number. These are the first mathematics articles ever nominated for approval! I've copied the nominating editor's remarks from the Forums below: Note that these articles can still be improved before the approval takes hold on Sunday, May 6. In particular, a few sections were rearranged or moved to other articles recently, so the current version probably doesn't flow as well as it used to from section to section. But also there are several comments on their discussion pages that haven't been addressed yet; while many of them can wait for the future, we might as well try to get as good a first version approved as we can. So be bold! Greg Martin
no new articles have been approved in the last two days
May 1, 2007
- Articles newly nominated for approval:
Two mathematics articles are now up for approval: Complex number and Prime number. These are the first mathematics articles ever nominated for approval! I've copied the nominating editor's remarks from the Forums below: Note that these articles can still be improved before the approval takes hold on Sunday, May 6. In particular, a few sections were rearranged or moved to other articles recently, so the current version probably doesn't flow as well as it used to from section to section. But also there are several comments on their discussion pages that haven't been addressed yet; while many of them can wait for the future, we might as well try to get as good a first version approved as we can. So be bold! Greg Martin
- Newly Approved Articles:
Our very first History articles to be approved!
CONGRATULATIONS!!
April 27, 2007
This announcement is for the wiki hackers among us: the skin for Approved articles needs a facial.
What's needed? (All registered users should feel free to add to & edit this list)
- Approved articles need a look that tells the user that he or she is reading an approved article
- A conventional means of indicating important facts (such as: nominating editor, date approved, list of approving editors) is also needed
- A clear disclaimer
What's been said so far?
Here are threads on the forum that all deserve our attention (please add to these):
- Article Approval notice box size too large? http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,861.0.html
- Re: Proof versions of articles« Reply #32 on: April 19, 2007, 04:43:23 PM »[1]
- Should there be a Group Approval Template? [2]
Here are current pages on Citizendium that have to do with Approval templates:
- Our current Nomination for Approval Template http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Template:ToApprove
Invitation to link sandbox trials here
(To make your own sandbox page, edit your user page and create a link to the sandbox page as if it already existed, like this: [[User:Nancy_Sculerati/Sandbox]]. After completing the edit, you'll see the red link; just click on the red link to start the new page. Any author can create a page anywhere in the same way. -- as per Pat Palmer)
Perhaps drafts of templates and styles for approved articles might be linked here?
- http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=User_talk:Larry_Sanger/Approved_in_pagehist&oldid=100084129
- http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Nancy_Sculerati/Sandbox
- http://www.harbormist.com/pat/Biology.htm - fake page with example of a watermark
April 26, 2007
Developing articles that need editors to nominate them for approval (or indicate what is needed before such nomination can be made):
Copying Jason's post from the Forums [3]: I have a favor to ask of the History Workgroup. The article First Punic War appears high on Google searches. It has been steadily climibing, currently 10 to 12 in rank on a search for first punic war. If this article can be pushed along to approved status, this would be good PR. -Jason Potkanski Tech Lead
April 24, 2007
Our first of the Tuesday Night Rundowns on approved articles begins! Our first set of announcements is itself an "announcement of firsts".
Developing articles that need editors to nominate them for approval (or indicate what is needed before such nomination can be made):
- Calling Mathematics editors to review:
These are candidates for our first Mathematics articles for nomination. Where are our editors?
- Articles newly nominated for approval:
Humanities
Our very first History articles to be nominated!
Just Approved Articles
- Infant colic Our very first Health Sciences article to be approved!