Wikipedia talk:Articles for improvement/Archive 19

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

→

Archive 25

Another suggestion for MusikBot

I think MusikBot should remove the articles that have already been selected in the schedule. If an article has been scheduled multiple times, the bot could look at all the dates later than the second-to-latest time of an article's scheduling. Feel free to give some more ideas and response. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 07:55, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

A few minutes later, I was also thinking about that moving the successfully nominated articles to the Articles for Improvement. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 07:57, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

If we remove those articles that has appeared at TAFI, then all articles at the list that has ever appeared at TAFI should be removed and move to wherever you decide. Regards.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:53, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

pinging @MusikAnimal: Schedule entries are presently archived here. The process appears to be manually performed at this time. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:45, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Sure, that can be added to the weekly task, no problem. I am going to clean up that page to make it more easily parsable by the bot. @Qwertyxp2000: I'm not really sure what you mean with your first point. Moving successfully nominated articles to WP:AFI will be covered by the daily task, which I am still working on but should be ready soon — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:37, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Umm... If an article is scheduled then remove any articles that are already in the Articles for Improvement. e.g. the Potato article is scheduled. Then the Potato article gets removed from the Articles for Improvement. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 19:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Yep! The bot should do this moving forward, as with [1]. I see you removed Princess Leia, which predates the bot task so I guess no one had manually removed it. Once the so-called TAFIDaily bot task is up and running, you should not need to update the list of articles for improvement at all. — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:48, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

(I wish to remind everyone that MusikAnimal is a human being who has volunteered their time to help us, and not a bot-monkey, so please remember to make suggestions not demands. I'm not saying that's what happened in this particular thread, but I can see it potentially happening moving forward and I think it would be a great disservice to Musik. :) )--Coin945 (talk) 02:54, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words :) It is quite alright, for some reason I actually enjoy programming. This project is particularly rewarding because there's so much painstaking manual effort put into it that I get to automate for everyone. That allows us to focus on the articles themselves, and not worry about all the housekeeping. Once all the bot work is done I'll be out helping with the articles too, and I very much look forward to it! — MusikAnimal ^talk 03:55, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for sounding so demanding, Coin945. Maybe I needed to reword myself first before sending anything that I send. :3 Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 06:47, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Qwerty, you were completely fine in this conversation. While reading this thread, I just had an uncomfortable flashforward to a dystopian future. Haha I'm probably overthinking things, but if I volunteered and over time started to see my role become like a servant rather than a contributor, I'd be annoyed, offended, and probably leave. So I decided to preemptively strike just in case. Glad we're all on the same page. :D--Coin945 (talk) 06:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

The TAFI article for Week 53 of 2015

File:Kissinger Man of the Year.jpg

Henry Kissinger was a Person of the Year when he was chosen as Time Person of the Year in 1972 along with with Richard Nixon.

The selection for week 53 (starting 28 December 2015) is Person of the Year. — MusikBot ^talk 00:04, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Discussion (week 53)

Please any comments or concerns about the selection here. If three net members elect to reselect the article, then the article will be reselected and the former one removed from the list of articles.

The TAFI article for Week 1 of 2016

King Mswati III, the monarch of Swaziland, one of the Monarchies in Africa.

The selection for week 1 (starting 04 January 2016) is Monarchies in Africa. — MusikBot ^talk 01:22, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Discussion (week 1)

Please any comments or concerns about the selection here. If three net members elect to reselect the article, then the article will be reselected and the former one removed from the list of articles.

TAFIDaily bot task

I think I have the daily task complete. Here's what it entails:

• Checking the nominations page for approved/unapproved entries. Despite the task's name, this will happen twice a day, or whatever we decide on.
• Add approved entries to Wikipedia:Articles for improvement/List. A subpage is more favourable here to make things easier for the bot and also you can transclude the list anywhere you want.
• Archive the discussion of approved/unapproved entries to Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Nominations/Archives/YEAR/MONTH (where YEAR and MONTH are the current year/month). Archiving under the normal system archiving bots use isn't very straightforward to implement, and I think organizing the archives chronologically will make it easier for referencing.
• Rotate the list of nominations once a day. This includes rotating the level 2 headings, and the level 3 headings within them.

Additionally, archiving only happens N number of hours after the last comment was made, as specified by User:MusikBot/TAFIDaily/config.js. This is how normal archiving works, as it gives people time to observe the result of the discussion before it is archived. To clarify, approved entries are still added to the AFI list as soon as the bot parses the page, they just aren't necessarily archived yet.

How does this sound? Am I missing anything? If we're all OK with this I'll file a BRFA — MusikAnimal ^talk 06:15, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

• I Support that. Sounds good.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:56, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

@Northamerica1000: any insight? — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:06, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

I need some rough consensus here before I can file a BRFA. The code is ready :) — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:14, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

• Support – Sounds great, and truly appreciated. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:13, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
• Support – Great work, and thanks for all your help! Ry's the Guy ^{(talk|contribs)} 07:12, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
• Support - Especially the month-based nomination archive. P.S. I have added the bolding. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 07:51, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

(←) BRFA filed. Thank you all. Going to add in a few more ideas:

• Automatically mark entries as {{unapproved}} comment that a nomination is a duplicate if is already listed at Wikipedia:Articles for improvement
• Automatically add the article class assessment if it was not added by the nominator
• Once the new Pageview API is deployed, the bot could check and add page views if they are not added by the nominator

All but the last one I can implement now. If you have anymore ideas feel free to let me know. Best — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:52, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Wait, the "already there" bit should be "{{unapproved}} There is already an article in the Articles for Improvement.". Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 22:18, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

I've amended the bullet above! :) A simple comment will be better — MusikAnimal ^talk 22:40, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps "It looks like there is already an article in the Articles for Improvement. Please have a check." or something better. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 02:47, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

• Comment - oh, you said all Level 2 and Level 3's. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 21:07, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Commencement

Alrighty, the TAFIDaily bot task is Y running, under a trial period for up to two or three weeks, however long it takes to show it won't mess up. It is set to run at 04:35 (UTC) and 16:35 (UTC) daily. I've tested it thoroughly on testwiki, but as always it's impossible to predict what will happen in production, so let me know if you see anything funky! If the bot messed up you are safe to revert it – it won't attempt again until the next job 12 hours later. Errors are logged at User:MusikBot/TAFIDaily/Error log but probably won't say anything useful to a non-developer. Best — MusikAnimal ^talk 21:57, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

@Northamerica1000: (and everyone else), two additions I've noticed we need, correct me if I'm wrong:

• Add {{empty section}} to any empty sections on the nomination board. The bot has been removing them as it is hard programmed to structure sections in a certain way, which is necessary to maintain consistency and ensure they are parsable
• Archive any nominations as unapproved that have had no discussion in over 21 days

Anything else? — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:16, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• Support both. @MusikAnimal: It will be nice to not have to manually add empty section templates as I and others have performed, and automatic archiving for unapproved entries would be a great bonus. Unless I'm missing something, all other entries are presently archived by ClueBot III, so it makes sense for dated entries that are neither approved or unapproved after 21 days to also be auto-archived. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:35, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

  Nah, ClueBot is no more! It would potentially conflict with MusikBot's processing so I implemented my own archiving. It appears be working as intended [2], although I want to improve that edit summary to indicate how many were approved/denied and where it is archiving to. I've also updated the bot to add {{empty section}} [3], so should be good there.

  Finally, your input is encouraged at the TAFIWeekly BRFA. It was a rough 4 weeks, but this past Sunday went almost perfectly. Many of you may not have even noticed the errors of past weeks, as they were quickly fixed. — MusikAnimal ^talk 23:16, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

  Also Northamerica1000 if you don't mind, please allow the bot to add to the nominations list. I saw you did that here. The bot will do this automatically and will also make sure the article classification is included — MusikAnimal ^talk 01:18, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

  @MusikAnimal: You got it. Wow, this is really coming along. Do users still need to add the {{Approved}} / {{Unapproved}} templates to entries at the nominations page? (I'm guessing yes). Also, if you could update the project automation page about use/non use of the templates, it would help out (I wasn't sure about how your crazy bot works). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:01, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

  @MusikAnimal: I added the Rotate nomination page sections and add Empty section template functions to the automation page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:08, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

  @Northamerica1000: The bot does not add {{approved}} or {{unapproved}} to nomination discussions. It can, going by the instructions outlined on the nominations page, but I feel like that sort of thing needs human review. For instance, if we got trolled and some sock was opposing every nomination. Those !votes we would want to discount, and the bot wouldn't know to do so. However it's probably safe to close as unapproved if a nomination discussion is left untouched 21 days, so the bot can do that much. I will update the automation page shortly. Also again, don't misconstrue this as canvassing, but feedback is needed from TAFI members at the TAFIWeekly BRFA to evaluate the bot's performance. Note in particular the step-by-step outline at the bottom, that was what happened this past Monday. Many thanks for your time! — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:30, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

  Yep, human review is necessary. Agreed with that human review idea because of what you said about the trolling and socks. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 23:21, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

• Well another thing we have to add probably may need to add is the one-off addition of all of the previous weeks' WP:TAFIACCOMP stuff. If I were to finish this all up, it would take months and months for me, which is why I was never bothered further updating as it was way too tedious. I had also called someone, with much hassle, and he only did two weeks of TAFI from that call. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 01:57, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

  I might could write a script to fill in the data from 2015/23 to 2015/28, but I'll be honest, it's not very high priority. Something I'd like to spend more time on is porting a WP:DYKCHECK script over to a backend service. The bot would use this for our purposes, but it'd just be nice to have an API service for this sort of thing rather than making users manually run the script. I could even automate checking for the DYK project... another potential bot task much further down the road — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:45, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

  Yep, that was the bit I was talking about. Sorry if I do the incorrect wording. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 02:46, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

And also wanting to update all of the weeks missing. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 02:47, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

The TAFI article for Week 3 of 2016

New England clam chowder

The selection for week 3 (starting 18 January 2016) is Chowder. — MusikBot ^talk 00:09, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Discussion (week 3)

Please any comments or concerns about the selection here. If three net members elect to reselect the article, then the article will be reselected and the former one removed from the list of articles.