Wikipedia:Collaboration of the week/Archive

Each week, Wikipedians nominate an article to become the collaboration of the week. The aim is to produce featured-standard articles, through widespread cooperative editing. This project aims to fill holes in Wikipedia, so only non-existent articles, or stubs may be nominated. If the article does not fit these guidelines, it should be placed on the Article Improvement Drive for further expansion and improvement.

The next project article is to be selected on Sunday, August 13, 2006. 00:00 UTC (Template:DAYSTOSUNDAY)

The current UTC time is 07:51, December 24, 2024.

• Previous collaborations may be found at past collaborations.
• Failed nominations may be found at failed nominations.
• Editors wishing to help run this project may visit COTW maintenance.

How to nominate

Here is template for nominations:

===[[ARTICLE]] (1 vote, stays until [[DATE ONE WEEK LATER]])===
:''Nominated [[MONTH DAY]], [[YEAR]]; needs at least 3 votes by [[DATE ONE WEEK LATER]], [[YEAR]]''

; Support:
# (sign with four tildes)

; Comments:
* (put your reason for nomination, sign again)

----

1. Copy and paste the template to the bottom of the list of nominations on this page and fill it out. It is important to use UTC time; the current time and date now is 07:51, Tuesday, December 24, 2024 (UTC).
2. Under "comments" section put explanation of what work is needed.
3. After submitting the new nomination, go to the nominated article and put {{COTW}}{{to do}} on the top of the article's talk page.

Considerations

• Please only nominate stubs (articles of two short paragraphs or less).
• Giving good reasons will help others in supporting your nomination.
• Articles should interest a wide number of people, so many can contribute to the article's improvement.
• If you're thinking of renominating an article which has recently failed, consider waiting a month before renominating it.

How to vote

Sign with "# ~~~~" on the end of the list of the article you want to vote for and then update the vote count in the subhead. Opposing votes are not counted; see approval voting.

• Only registered users may vote, and their first edit must have been before the article was nominated.
• Only support votes and comments should be added, as the articles are chosen by approval voting.
• Only vote for articles that you will personally help to improve, either with research or with writing.
• Do not vote for all of the nominations. If you do, your votes will be discounted, as people can't expect you to work on all of them.
• The article with the most votes at selection time will become the next COTW.
• Articles that fail to receive 3 votes per week from the time of nomination will be removed from this page.

You can vote for as many articles as you like. If, after you vote, the vote count equals the "needs at least xx votes by", then add 3 to "needs at least xx votes" and add a week to date in vote count and "needs at least xx votes by" notice.

Example. You encounter this situation and decide to vote:

===[[History of X]] (23 votes, stays until [[February 7]], [[2006]])===
:''Nominated [[December 8]], [[2005]]; needs at least 24 votes by [[February 7]], [[2006]]''

First you put "# ~~~~" on the end of the list of people who voted for that article and then change the vote count and date in following manner:

===[[History of X]] (24 votes, stays until [[February 14]], [[2006]])===
:''Nominated [[December 8]], [[2005]]; needs at least 28 votes by [[February 14]], [[2006]]''

Constant contributors to COTW can place {{User COTW}} onto their user pages. It looks like this:

This user participated in Collaboration of the week.

How the article is elected

The article with the most votes on each Sunday in 00:00 UTC is elected as "The current Article Improvement Drive article". If two or more articles have same number of votes, the oldest nominee wins.

How an article is removed from the list

Articles need three votes per week to stay on the list. If current date (December 24 2024) exceeds "stays until" date of particular article, unless that article has the most votes of all current nominations, that article entry is removed from this page and moved to failed nominations.

Nominations

Lee Smith (baseball) (6 votes, stays until August 16)

Nominated July 26, 2006; needs at least 9 votes by August 16, 2006

Support

1. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 21:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
2. Em-jay-es 02:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
3. PDXblazers 03:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
4. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
5. --M@rēino 13:57, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
6. --Nishkid64 19:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• The all time leader in Baseball saves, one of the top relief pitchers of All-Time, just a stub list Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 21:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Definitely one of the top relievers in baseball history - deserves a much better article. Em-jay-es 02:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
• Its saves, not safes, but, yeah, this article stinks. PDXblazers 03:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

  Fixed the two typos :) Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 03:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• Oh yeah, we can do better than this for Lee Smith. --M@rēino 13:57, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
• It's a shame that Lee Smith is not in the Hall of Fame even though he's had quite an impressive career, which includes being the career leader in saves. Hopefully, we can do justice for one of the best relievers in baseball history.--Nishkid64 19:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

---

Cultural history of the United States (5 votes, stays until August 12)

Nominated July 29, 2006; needs at least 6 votes by August 12, 2006

Support

1. C. M. Harris 22:35, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
2. Sauvastika 16:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
3. Davodd 04:00, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
4. BRIAN0918 17:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
5. Alexandermiller 05:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• The article acknowledges that it is a "broad topic", and yet I can't name a single article shorter than this that wasn't tagged for speedy deletion. It's already on Requests for Expansion without any improvement. C. M. Harris 22:35, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

---

Historical geography (4 votes, stays until August 16)

Nominated August 2, 2006; needs at least 6 votes by August 16, 2006

Support

1. PDXblazers 06:12, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
2. jwanders^Talk 16:12, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
3. Ynhockey ^(Talk) 18:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
4. EamonnPKeane 14:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• Very interesting field that is slowly gaining more importance in the academic world. This short stub does not do it justice.

---

Technological rationality (1 vote, stays until August 9)

Nominated August 2, 2006; needs at least 3 votes by August 9, 2006

Support

1. jwanders^Talk 12:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• Interesting subject that was on the request list for over a year. I've stubbed it with a cited exerpt from a paper online, but there google alone has lots more info we could compile a great article from. --jwanders^Talk 12:13, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

---

A Raisin in the Sun (2 vote, stays until August 9)

Nominated August 2, 2006; needs at least 3 votes by August 9, 2006

Support

1. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 22:51, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
2. --Nishkid64 19:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• One of the most significant plays of the 20th century. Rather stubby. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 22:51, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
• A Raisin in the Sun is not only a classic 20th century play, but also the first play written by a black woman to appear on Broadway. I think we should definitely expand on such a landmark piece of literature. --Nishkid64 19:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

---

Job security (1 vote, stays until August 16)

Nominated August 9, 2006; needs at least 3 votes by August 16, 2006

Support

1. ZeWrestler ^Talk 19:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• Interesting topic that was nominated a while back, but failed to gather enough support. The article is an important topic expecially after the Great Depression, Dot-com boom and the effects outsourcing has on an economy. Therefore, I believe we should work to improve this article to higher standards. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 19:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

---