Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
'''Support''' |
'''Support''' |
||
# ~~~~ |
# ~~~~ |
||
'''Comments''' |
|||
</pre> |
|||
===[[Fun]]=== |
|||
Important subject that we all enjoy. How can this be a Stub?. [[User:Horai 551|Horai 551]] ([[User talk:Horai 551|talk]]) 10:51, 3 November 2012 (UTC) |
|||
'''Support''' |
|||
# [[User:Horai 551|Horai 551]] ([[User talk:Horai 551|talk]]) 10:51, 3 November 2012 (UTC) |
|||
'''Comments''' |
'''Comments''' |
Revision as of 10:51, 3 November 2012
This week's article for improvement is |
Breaking wave |
---|
Please be bold and help improve it! |
This page contains a list of articles nominated to be Today's article for improvement (TAFI). Please do not nominate an article unless you are fairly certain that it meets notability guidelines. Any nomination of an article that does not meet this criteria may be quickly removed. Any user may nominate and support or oppose an article below, however only members of this project may close nominations as successful or unsuccessful. An article that is chosen to be a TAFI will be added to the schedule.
To nominate an article, please add:
===[[Name of article]]=== Nomination text. ~~~~ Support
Oppose
Comments
|
at the top of the following list.
Nominations
How to Nominate an Article
|
---|
To nominate an article, add at the top of the list of candidates, filling in the name of the article and the nomination text (which should indicate why the article would benefit from a collaboration and what needs to be improved). ===[[Name of article]]=== Nomination text. ~~~~ '''Support''' # ~~~~ '''Comments''' FunImportant subject that we all enjoy. How can this be a Stub?. Horai 551 (talk) 10:51, 3 November 2012 (UTC) Support Comments |
Bureaucracy
Start-class article of a very important topic. Coin945 (talk) 10:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Home
As opposed to house. This is a universal concept that is very poorly covered - currently listed as Stub class. Because this is "soft" concept it is difficult to convey the meaning of the word. The article currently gets lost a bit while trying to cover the psychological effects of having/not having a home, as well as trying to define it for animals. Wittylama 06:14, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Blood
Very listy. Hasn't been changed in years. Sooo much that needs to be covered. Pretty much all its edit history for the past 3 or so years (probably more) is all reverting vandalism. Shame, because its a very important topic too.... :'( Coin945 (talk) 15:53, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
- I agree that much could be done, but by TAFI standards it's a reasonably well developed article. —WFC— FL wishlist 05:45, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Cerium/Holmium/Praseodymium/Erbium (take your pick)
These four are (I'm pretty sure) the only start-class element articles that are fairly low on the Periodic Table (as in naturally occurring and discovered a while ago). They're all core article. Lots of coverage holes. Any one of them would be a good choice IMO. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Salt (chemistry)
Start-class core article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
- Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
- Just about undeveloped enough for TAFI to be beneficial. —WFC— FL wishlist 05:46, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
Dysentery
C-class core article (althoguh looks a lot more start-like). Lots of coverage holes. Yucky subject, but who knows - might be one to pull in the nostalgics. Oregon Trail, anyone? :) Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Melody
Start-class core article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Nail (fastener) - as in the one you hit into a wall
Start-class core article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Church (building)
Start-class core article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Lake Titicaca
Start-class core article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
- By TAFI standards this is at a relatively advanced stage of development. —WFC— FL wishlist 05:48, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Poultry
Stub-class core article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
- Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
- Northamerica1000(talk) 22:45, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
- Horai 551 (talk) 10:25, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Comments
Male and/or Female
Start-class vital articles. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
News
Start-class vital article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
- Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
- —Tom Morris (talk) 13:19, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
- Northamerica1000(talk) 22:44, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Comments
Journalism
Start-class vital article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Cereal
Cereal is a start-class vital article. Lots of coverage holes.Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Board game
Start-class vital article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Recreation
Start-class vital article. Lots of coverage holes. (possibly a bit too close to my "entertainment" suggestion)Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Word
Start-class vital article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Adult and/or Child
Start-class vital articles. Lots of coverage holes. (child could be merge with childhood and preadolescence) Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Furniture
Start-class vital article. Lots of coverage holes. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Fiction
Start-class vital article. Lots of coverage holes Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Comedy
C class fundamental human concept. Pretty much only history is covered. Coin945 (talk) 07:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Racism
It has some copyright violation issues and could easily be improved upon. Go Phightins! 20:05, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Past nominations
Bedrock
This is a major subject in Earth Science. However, This article has only about 130 words, and two references! --Horai 551 (talk) 11:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
- --Horai 551 (talk) 11:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
- Given how short the article is. —WFC— FL wishlist 05:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
List of alcoholic beverages
Following on from the relative success of List of food preparation utensils, I think this is another viable candidate for improvement. A format similar to List of culinary nuts would seem the best way forward, given that most alcoholic beverages fall under sub-categories (such as wines, beers and spirits). —WFC— FL wishlist 08:15, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
- As nom. —WFC— FL wishlist 08:15, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
Tokyo Disneyland
Tokyo Disneyland is the biggest tourist attraction of Japan. However, this article is fairly small. There is information about the themed areas, but not much else. Horai 551 (talk) 07:24, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
George M. Dallas
Dallas was the vice president under James Knox Polk in the mid 1840s. For a vice president of the United States, his article is pretty bad. This is great for collaboration because it's a Start-class BLP (check that, general biography) with more coverage out there (if not on the web in reference books, but the web would be a start). Anyway, I think this would be a great candidate for TAFI. Thanks-- Go Phightins! (talk) 01:42, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
- Go Phightins! (talk) 01:42, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
- Although I must note that this is not a BLP. Dallas died in 1864. AutomaticStrikeout 02:31, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, meant general biography. He'd be pretty old to still be a BLP. Go Phightins! (talk) 02:33, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Oppose
- Obscure topic, only gets about 100 pageviews per day. Kaldari (talk) 20:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
- Have to disagree that a former U.S. VP and Secy. of State is "obscure". Go Phightins! 20:34, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
Tomboy
Currently barely more than a stub. This article would be great for collaboration because it's mostly a blank slate and there are both academic and popular culture angles to write about. The article currently average 1328 page views per day, which is pretty high. Kaldari (talk) 22:51, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Support
Comments
Sexual repression
Freud (the early describer of this phenomena) is everywhere in how we think about society, and sexual repression is a concept utilized by many many different theorists as well as social movements (think hippies, LGBT, etc.). Besides, it's controversial enough that it might bring people with enough motive to improve the article, Sadads (talk) 20:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Support
'Comments
- I fear this may be opposed for the same reasons my suggestion of Human body was... But good luck to you. If it passes, then awesome. It sound like an intriguing topic. :)--Coin945 (talk) 04:32, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
For He's a Jolly Good Fellow
Level 3 Vital article. One of the most popular songs of all time. Coin945 (talk) 16:42, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Support
- Yes, very good! This article can be improved by finding references for all the information. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:04, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Comments
- I don't feel there would be enough interest in editing this and feel it would be better left as someone's pet project. Ryan Vesey 17:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Your probably right. My reasoning for the two song requests was that if this is sort of stuff lots of our newbies like to edit anywsys (the latest top 40 hit/episode of favourite tv show etc., then why not start off with them to make the newbies feel at home.--Coin945 (talk) 18:20, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Rock (geology)
Level 3 Vital article. A very major topic that is rather poorly covered Coin945 (talk) 16:42, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Support
- Coin945 (talk) 16:42, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Terrible if we can't get rocks to GA or FA. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Article only has 7 references! Kaldari (talk) 06:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Oppose
- Man, this article is really complicated! GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:01, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, it's a bit complicated, but the main thing that is needed is just adding references, which shouldn't be too difficult. Kaldari (talk) 19:13, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
- Sadads (talk) 20:17, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
Shape
Level 3 Vital article. A very major topic that is rather poorly covered. Coin945 (talk) 16:42, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Support
- Coin945 (talk) 16:42, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Again something that SHOULD be GA or FA. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Oppose
- Man, this article is really complicated! GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- This topic is way to broad for focused collaboration in my opinion. Honestly, I don't know where one would start on this, I'd prefer a BLP. Go Phightins! (talk) 20:37, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments
Oil
Level 3 Vital article. A very major topic that is rather poorly covered Coin945 (talk) 16:40, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Support
- Coin945 (talk) 16:40, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Awkward subject, but should be expanded upon a lot. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:18, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Comments
- My own opinion: Just because something is "common knowledge" does not mean the article can or should be improved, nor, indeed, does it mean that editors will have an interest in improving it or that they will have the ability to do so. Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:12, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Night in paintings (Eastern art)
Needs some more text and references. RexRowan Talk 13:04, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Support
- RexRowan Talk 13:04, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, a good one! This article is already being worked on and has some good tips on its Talk page. The writing is clear, and one doesn't need to know a lot about the subject in order to help improve it with some commonsense additions or corrections. Thank you. GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:30, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Comments I think its too obscure for the average wikipedia reader to really get involved. Sorry...--Coin945 (talk) 14:08, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- No worries, I think we got the right people working on it at the moment, although some expert input would be appreciated if anyone happens to have the knowledge. Thanks ahead!-- RexRowan Talk 14:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
I'll agree with Coin. In addition, like you said Rex, there are some great improvements being made already and it's a bit of a niche topic that many people can't help on. Ryan Vesey 17:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- One to watch for sure. Since it is already going under major rework, it should not be put up, the only result would be to confuse and usurp the editorial work of the current contributor. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:02, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Human body
One of the most basic human concepts. How can this article be so bad? Coin945 (talk) 10:13, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Might also have to check out Human anatomy, Human biology, Human physical appearance and Human physiology as there's a lot of cross-over, as well as holes in coverage.
Support
- Coin945 (talk) 10:13, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- -- RexRowan Talk 12:59, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Inexcusable to have this be so basic, even as a jumping off point, its too lacking. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:22, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Oh, bugger the nudity. It's an important topic. Although I believe those of us who aren't dogs may have a conflict of interest. —Tom Morris (talk) 08:51, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Oppose
- Per the article apparently containing nudity, as mentioned below. I'm not going to check to find out and I'm not going to make any contributions to this article. I know that some might not appreciate me opposing on the grounds I'm using, but guess what, it's my !vote and that's my opinion. AutomaticStrikeout 16:22, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Well, you could just use the CSS image blocker. That was the whole point of the conversation. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:24, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, maybe I could, but I'm not going to because I have a moral objection to contributing to/calling attention to an article with that kind of content. That might not be a popular opinion, but I'm not going to go against my conscience here. AutomaticStrikeout 16:28, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I think that a moral objection is a little ridiculous, but then I think that rain is wet, so who am I to judge? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:37, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Writ, I think you're taking a stance that is a bit too satirical here. It is reasonable for someone to have a moral objection to this. I don't, but my comment below was related to the idea that people can. It's also fine for you to disagree with a moreal objection, but there's no reason to equate moral objections and opinions on blatantly obvious things. Ryan Vesey 19:06, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- *sigh* I kinda saw that coming. It wasn't intended to be satirical, it's (another) reference to Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and the solipsist Ruler of the Universe. I mean no offense, and quite apologize for the misunderstanding. Poor joke on my part. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:19, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- I apologize, I thought you were making light of his views, probably should have wikilinked "I think that rain is wet". Okay, let's just keep on keeping on. Ryan Vesey 19:23, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- *sigh* I kinda saw that coming. It wasn't intended to be satirical, it's (another) reference to Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and the solipsist Ruler of the Universe. I mean no offense, and quite apologize for the misunderstanding. Poor joke on my part. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:19, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Writ, I think you're taking a stance that is a bit too satirical here. It is reasonable for someone to have a moral objection to this. I don't, but my comment below was related to the idea that people can. It's also fine for you to disagree with a moreal objection, but there's no reason to equate moral objections and opinions on blatantly obvious things. Ryan Vesey 19:06, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I think that a moral objection is a little ridiculous, but then I think that rain is wet, so who am I to judge? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:37, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, maybe I could, but I'm not going to because I have a moral objection to contributing to/calling attention to an article with that kind of content. That might not be a popular opinion, but I'm not going to go against my conscience here. AutomaticStrikeout 16:28, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Well, you could just use the CSS image blocker. That was the whole point of the conversation. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:24, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Comments
- To be honest, I don't like the idea of using this article because it contains nudity. Even though the nudity is scientific, I feel that there will be editors who don't want to take part in this collaboration as a result. The community portal receives ~10,000 hits a day and I feel like some would be contributors would be put off if the.. TAFI link sent them to a page containing nudity. It also creates trouble for anyone editing from work or a public place. Ryan Vesey 04:30, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- We could hide the image. I remember reading in one of the wikiforums about finding a way to have image automatically popped down - like templates are. That could be an idea, at least during the editing period. Of course the caption will remain so editors know such an image has already been included.--Coin945 (talk) 05:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- We couldn't do that per WP:NOTCENSORED; however, someone intelligent might be able to put together some CSS so that an individual editor could hide only images on that page. That still wouldn't fix the problem for unknowing editors/new editors (Seeing nudity can be very dramatic for someone who isn't aware of our not censored policy), but it would solve the problem for editors who want to improve the article from work or a public place. Ryan Vesey 05:47, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- The relevant CSS would be
body[class~=page-Human_body] .image{display:none;}
. How to get people who want this to actually install it is left as an exercise to the reader. ;) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:52, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- The relevant CSS would be
- Ive been trying to move the image down to the reproductive system section... But im editing on my phone and its really hard. It seems this article missed out on the discussion that affected articles like Mohammad surrounding taboo images high up in an article. At least if anyone casually clicks on out, they then won't get a nasty surprise.--Coin945 (talk) 05:46, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- I don't care about the possibility of some users deciding not to participate in one particular week's collaboration due to the subject matter. Nor do I care that there will inevitably be complaints about our choice of article if or when we run this. However, I do care that users who are uncomfortable with nudity, who haven't yet heard of TAFI, might avoid TAFI altogether if the first they hear about us is as a result of choosing this article.
In summary, this is a good choice of article, but I would prefer that we don't go with it until we are a little bit more established (2–3 months). —WFC— 14:02, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Comment - Sadly, the moral issue is one that will be front and center. While it contains nudity with purpose, it is still something that could lead to an awkward situation. Let's play it safe, and medical articles are not friendly to most contributors because of the subject matter. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 01:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
William Craig (logician)
Raymond Smullyan, a long-standing popularizer of mathematical logic as a sub-class of recreational mathematics (or not, but simply human), in 2009 released a book he calls the link between all of his previous 'popular' (by category) writings and other material that truly involved him at the 'game' of Theorem proving. In this book, the 6th part (and 23rd chapter), begins with reference to (as its title) Craig's Interpolation Lemma. Though living, the subject is mid-90s in age--and this is neither here nor there. He is an emeritus professor at the University of California at Berkeley and would not be to be bothered, perhaps (I have no knowledge as to his condition in life), but by those near to him who might encourage the result sought for with this. It is suggested that the book I am mildly-obliquely referring to be read for that part or its subject known for a comment unless this falls outside of the possible domain of this section as a living subject (a matter I don't expect to be, but may be, the case). The improvement would be first an add on the mathematics, so that should and will be done first if this is to be done. I will need an assist (back-up or reduplication, that is) in event my working the technical part is not done well.Julzes (talk) 22:39, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Just an update. I myself have done next to nothing on this. Breezed through a bit of the book, but there is quite a bit more I would need to do myself to effect any relevant changes here.Julzes (talk) 19:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)