Category talk:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit/Archive 1

Yu Yu Hakusho

They Yu Yu Hakusho page needs editing by someone who's at least vaguely familiar with the show in order to avoid syntax changes that could alter the meaning. You dig? Good luck... Molinero 03:35, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

FilePile

The article FilePile has been locked because of the crazy people, yet the copyedit tag is still in it. Any sysop around with special powers who can sneak in and remove the tag? -- Elizabeyth 18:59, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Looks like this article has been deleted, so problem solved. -- Beland 02:50, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Talk pages

Is there ever a reason for talk pages to be on here. I thought we weren't supposed to edit them, atleast not for basic grammer and spelling. Could a more "senior" member clairify? Bigbadbyte 07:38, August 27, 2005 (UTC)

I assume it just means that the associated article page needs copyediting. Some people just put article attention tags at the top of talk pages accidentally, or because they prefer to do it that way. Sometimes tags are added to talk pages accidentally, too, because of syntax errors. (These are OK to fix by adding "nowiki" tags. -- Beland 02:50, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Sub-category

This category seems to have itself as a sub-category?! I don't think it used to. Is it easy to fix? Nick Watts 13:07, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Lords of Dogtown

I think I've cleaned up the article enough that it no longer necessitates the copy-editing tag. Can someone check to confirm? Thanks. --Nevah Entitar 06:17, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Question

What is up with all of these stubs being added to this page?

here are some reasons they should not be added.

• The article is likely to change in major ways(ie being expanded).
• There is not much infomation for anyone to copy-edit.
• The structure of the article will not be the same after someone else adds more (needed) infomation.

Can someone clarify?Eagle (talk) (desk) 18:35, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion it is useful having stubs listed here. The copyedit tag often isn't the most appropriate so when visiting the article the most useful contribution can be to do a copyedit on whats there, and then change the tag to expand or something else more suitable, and leave a note on the talk page suggesting the copyedit tag can be replaced when there is enough to work from . Kcordina 09:31, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I am starting at the top of the list and slowly working my way down it. Each time I come to an article that does not need copy-editing (either because the copy is fine, or because there is basically no copy) I am removing the tag and leaving a note on the talk page. JenLouise 06:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

What do I do with an article that has been accidentally plagiarized?

Hi, I'm new here. In the process of editing an article in the copy editing queue, I've discovered that it has been copied from a web site in what is probably a case of accidental plagiarism. What do I do next? Thanks. --Carol Hattrup 19:42, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

There was a short discussion on Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject League of Copyeditors. I personally think the best idea is to reword as you edit, since that fixes both grammatical problems and plagiarism. I just did this exact same thing for Hakata ningyo. This is of course easier if the article is short or needs major rewording to start with. Clockwork 01:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

My user page listed on Copy Editing

User_talk:Paul Pigman has ended up on the copy-editing page but I don't really know how. It's my talk page. I've scanned the code on my talk page and I don't see the label/code/template there. I have been doing some work on copy-editing but I haven't used or put the template on any pages so far so I don't think I've done it myself. Help? --Pigman (talk • contribs) 18:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

And I should mention that it shows up in the list under the "A" listing. --Pigman (talk • contribs) 20:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Paul, I would take it as a sign. I think that the WikiGods are telling you that your userpage requires copyediting :)

I've noticed quite a few other userpages like yours that are going through the same problem, I haven't been able to find anything about them that should be directing them here.Trusilver 03:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

It's true I don't pay as close attention to my writing on my user page as I should but, really! It's boring. It's much more fun to copyedit strange pages. Still, it would be good to track down the reason for this strangeness. --Pigman (talk • contribs) 04:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Now it's happened to my page. --Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

OK - Pigman figured out how to fix it. To fix the link, html is needed, not wikification. Don't trust the preview. It looks fine in preview then adds user page to category. --Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Shortcut

I can never remember the exact name of this page. I suggest making a redirect for it like the one for WP:IFY. It would, however, be a cross-namespace redirect. Anyone object if I make it? delldot | talk 18:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, apparently no violent opposition, so I'm going to go ahead. See CAT:COPY and CAT:CE. delldot | talk 06:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Problem with Marathi Language article

On the Category page, there is a listing for the page Talk:Marathi language. But I cannot find anywhere in the article a reference or template that references this category. Can anyone help figure out what's going on here? --Otheus 20:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

• You may be confusing the "cleanup" tag with the "copy-edit" tag. There was a cleanup tag on the article. -Pgan002 04:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

"All" articles needing copy edit?

This page confuses me... there are 52 pages listed at the bottom as needing copy edits, but there is a subcategory called "All articles needing copy edit" that lists 200 pages. What is the difference between the two lists? Clockwork 01:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Er I should say that the "All articles needing copy edit" contains many more than 200 pages. Clockwork 01:26, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

It's just that the pages down the bottom havne't been tagged correctly according to the system that categorises them. I'm not sure if that makes sense. What I mean is when someone add the {{copyedit}} tag to a page it shows up down the bottom. Then that tag gets replaced with a copy-edit tag that classifies it. If it down the bottom the tag hasn't been updated. Hope that makes some sense! JenLouise 04:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

February 2007

This might sound lame, but we should really try to fix the last 43 articles for February 07. I would look good to finish at least one month. Mm40 (talk) 01:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

HUGE BACKLOG

I say we organize a big effort to reduce this back log to being respectable. I volunteer to lead this. I might be thinking big, but tell me your thoughts on my talk page. Mm40 (talk) 01:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

June 2008 - Active members?

Hello everyone! This backlog has been huge, and the League of Copyeditors is about to be deleted. I know there are a few of us still out there who help out with copy-editing once in a while, so how about we all come together, try to get organized (like what Mm40 said a few months ago (above), and help pull in more people to join the effort? -Samuel tan85 (talk) 10:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. Hi there. I would organize it, but I'm leaving for 7-8 weeks this Wednesday. You guys can either do it with me or without me. We could do it tomorrow, but that would require a lot of word spreading. Or we can just do it until we finish over time, Just because this is dead doesn't mean it can't be worked at.  Mm40 (talk | contribs)  10:21, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm here too. I'm still working on a huge overhaul of a big article (Herpes Simplex) left over from LOCE days, but I'll be particpating in general CE here once I finish. Livitup (talk) 18:06, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

There's a newish project for copy-editing and such, Wikipedia: Peer Review. There's a page in there where volunteers can put up their names. -Samy85 (talk) 01:32, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Graph showing articles needing copy-edit by month

It shows 2100 articles needing copy-editing and then 500 for Jan, 150 for Feb etc, making a total of 4096 to do. But the 2100 is itself the total for all articles ie Jan to now, so we're counting them twice ! (There are only 2100 to do altogether, made up of 500 for Jan, 150 for Feb etc) I think I'm right ! thisisace 23:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

• Agreed, I counted no more than 2233 articles. This is much less demoralizing. I don't know how, but someone please fix the bot that creates the graph! It may encourage people to edit the articles. -Pgan002 03:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

• Just worked out it's not a bot - you give it the numbers and it draws it - so have updated it ! thisisace 23:37, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Updates

• Updated today; 4,243 articles remaining! -Samy85 (talk) 02:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject or taskforce to deal with the copy edit backlog

Hey all! I've been trying to gauge interest in a taskforce or even a wikiproject dedicated to maintaining and working on the category of articles needing copy edit, which has backlog reaching to January 2007. Already there are a few people interested in the idea; if you're interested or want to help, drop a note at my talk page! When there are enough of us interested, we can put up a proposal for the wikiproject and start working out the details. :) -Samuel Tan 01:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Archiving

Created an archive box and shifted the talk from 2005 to 2007 to the relevant archive.--Samuel Tan 09:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Feb 2007

I have reduced the February 2007 backlog to 13 articles, and one of those is pending deletion at AFD. I have encouraged AnnaFrance (talk · contribs) to help with clearing the January 2007 backlog. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 15:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Categorize by topic, not by date

I think it would be a lot more helpful if the list of articles needing copy edit could somehow be organized by topic, rather than age. Although copy editing is, to a certain extent, independent of the subject matter, no editing is entirely a standalone effort.

I occasionally do technical editing and manuscript review of books on computer topics. The editors always tell me to concentrate on just the technical aspects, and not to worry about grammar and spelling. But I can't help it. An error is an error.

If articles were categorized by topic, it would be easier to recruit volunteers who were interested in the subject matter. Nobody wants to spend hour and hours dragging their way through poorly-written articles on topics they don't care about anyway.

CaritasUbi (talk) 22:28, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good, although I don't really mind to learn something new about different topics. Anyway, how can articles arranged by topic? Does someone of us has to do it or can it be done automatically?--Kojozone (talk) 16:31, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I would be happy with just a list by category. This information is readily available in the page, and would be a matter of extracting pages that were marked as needing copy editing. I'm not a PHP guy, so I don't know how easy this would be (those "Special:xxx" pages seem to do it, somehow).

--CaritasUbi (talk) 02:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

2 years

We are now only two years behind. That is something ;)--Kojozone (talk) 20:52, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Makes me no sense

"This category is not shown on its member pages." How can a category have member pages? Unfree (talk) 00:55, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

That's saying that a page in this category won't display at the bottom that it's in this category. For example, you see that a page is in category:living people by looking at the list of categories, but this category won't appear in that list. Mm40 (talk) 14:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Copy-editing method and specific tags

Hey all. I've been thinking that for articles that are in such a bad shape that copy-editing can only do very limited improvement, we should try our best to improve the language and structure, and replace the copy-edit tag with more specific tags, like {{cleanup-rewrite}} or {{cleanup-jargon}} . This would apply especially to articles that are mostly unintelligible. Anyone have other ideas? -Samy85 (talk) 03:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I think you are 1000% right. Livitup (talk) 14:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

You are right, especially with some of the south Asian articles. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:22, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

April 2007

The backlog for April 2007 is down to 13. I'd say we're getting there! However, there are some quite hopeless articles (the racer with his "career highlights" for example or that Indian Robin Hood politician). We should decide what to do there. On the other hand, the Winx minor character article seems to look quite good by now. I don't know if there are a lot more ways to improve it. Cheers--Kojozone (talk) 08:35, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

What about proposing quite hopeless articles with poor references for deletion? --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Tagged for copyediting in 1997

Here are two articles tagged for copyediting in 1997, but I think that the problems with these articles cannot be resolved by copyediting. What do other editors think? If you decide the copyedit template can be removed, do it.

• Recurring themes in A Series of Unfortunate Events
• Majipoor inhabitants

I'd shoot these over to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels. There is a Lemony Snicket group that could work on the Series of Unfortunate Events page, and the Majipoor inhabitants also might go to the fantasy group. Before considering deletion, it's worth considering whether an appropriate group knows of their existence. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

These articles are not candidates for deletion, but something other than copyediting is needed. One of my principles is to make sure any article I work on from these lists has an appropriate WikiProject template, whether or not the copyedit template can be removed. --DThomsen8 (talk) 20:18, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I read both your posts at once and my brain got muddled. Adding Wikiproject templates is a great idea. I don't know where to find them, or haven't looked hard enough -- can send me to the right place? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes the WikiProject is obvious, and having put them in for months, I often know what to use. Other times I can follow a link in the article and get the right template or templates from a linked article talk page. You have mentioned two good places to draw attention to the articles I cite above. --DThomsen8 (talk) 21:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Undated articles

The list shows "Undated articles 9" but how do we see those 9 articles? --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

This list has grown to 17 articles. Apparently editors add the template without a date. How do we handle this?--DThomsen8 (talk) 22:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

June 2013

A Request

If you copy-edit an article in any of the sub-categories of this category, and decide that you have resolved the style, grammar, or punctuation problems, please remove the copy-edit tag. Most of the articles in the older monthly categories have already been copy-edited and only need the tag removed. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:01, 14 June 2013 (UTC)