User talk:AndonicO/Tzatziki Squad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives

Archive 1 - Start - March 2008

Contents 1 Cannon FAC successful 2 Hello 3 History of timekeeping devices. 4 Main Page date 5 Collab GA passed 6 Peer review 7 Harry Potter GA Nomination 8 Some loose ends 8.1 Cannon in the Middle Ages nominated for Tzatzikification 9 Timekeeping collaboration 10 Cannon. 11 I thought you might have wanted to see this 12 History of timekeeping devices.

[edit] Cannon FAC successful

Woohoo! 1 down, 19 to go! bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 03:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Yaaaaaay! Sorry I was on vacation for most of the FAC, hopefully I'll be around for the next one. J-stan's choice, I assume? Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 04:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Well done all. :) · AndonicO ^Hail! 08:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

This is really great, guys. By the way, I'm holding off on officially choosing the next collab, I'm waiting for the GAN to finish, but it's looking good. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 17:02, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I assume you're picking history of timekeeping devices? Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 18:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Uh-huh! :) Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 18:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Cool, I guess I'll get started then! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 18:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll join in ASAP, but I've got to catch up on a bit of reading first (i.e. eight books...). · AndonicO ^Hail! 18:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, TSQUAD! Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 20:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Time to hit the library again. Any bets on how long 19 more FAs will take us? bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 20:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hm. This one took us a bit more than 2 months, so 20 FAs should be about 40 months (38 to go), or about 3 1/6 years. Ouch. (BTW - what do we do when we've done 20 FAs?) Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 20:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Congrats for the FA. Keilana: we go to 50, then 100 :D. The Helpful One ^(Review) 20:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Originally I was going to make it 100... I changed my mind, thinking "whoa, I'll be pushing up daisies by then." :P · AndonicO ^Hail! 21:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

O_O that's a lot of FAs...we'll all be dead by then... Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 21:06, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

How about we shorten the FAs to about 5 or 10, and make the rest be GAs. As a broad definition for a TSQUAD GA, if at least one T-operative gets it there without significant help from outside editors, it can be counted. AO could look over their contribs to the article, and decide if it could be counted. This will still create a collaborative effort, without being overkill. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 21:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, to get them to FA they'll be GAs first... Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 21:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's a good idea, but FAs are a whole lot better than GAs, but they're also much harder, so we'll need a collab for them. We can count GAs, but we'll get so many it'll be funny. ;) · AndonicO ^Hail! 23:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

How many do we have so far from our members? I know I have two, and AO has three. bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 01:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Pass :) Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 02:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Pass? @Biblio: I've got four now. ;) · AndonicO ^Hail! 02:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Well, I'm back, great to see you guys again, wow cannon's an FA! Anyway I've archived the talk page cos it waas a little long and I'm gonna start work on the next article now.--Phoenix-wiki 19:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back. Hope you get to join in on the fun. bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 22:27, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, you missed cannon, don't miss the clocks. :) · AndonicO ^Hail! 23:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] History of timekeeping devices.

One thing I spotted straight off the bat (don't have time to read it, just took a peek): the article goes from ancient timekeeping devices to GPS (i.e. modern ones, skipping everything in between) in "Timekeeping history". Actually, that section isn't really needed, as the whole article could fit into it (as it should, considering it's the title), making it redundant. Also, a lot of unsourced parts (try gbook'ing, for example, "military watches" to source the "wristwatches" section). I'll probably not be able to help much these days, as I'm quite busy in real life... I'll try to hurry. ;) · AndonicO ^Hail! 01:37, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Right now I'm trying to fix the citations to convert them to cite templates, like in Cannon. bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 01:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, guys. I actually am busy myself. I'll be able to help out a bit, but not a ton. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 02:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Right, well last night I completely rewrote the sundail section and saved, unfortunatly my internet went down without me knowing and I lost an hours work :-( Will do it now. On another note SteveCrossin has joined us.--Phoenix-wiki 20:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The new guy with the cheesy grin that pwns vandals as well as those of veteran editors? Good to have him. ;) · AndonicO ^Hail! 21:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I've just found out about this "squad" when editing Medieval cathedral clocks on History of timekeeping devices & I'm intrigued about what the squad is about & how you select the articles for attention? How is this different to joining a wikiproject which also aims to ehance the quality of articles in a particular domain? Is it just a thing for admins? If I was to join, bringing 8 featured articles & various lists & GAs etc, would that damage the challenge of reaching 20 FAs?— Rod ^talk 16:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for checking us out. Also, thanks for helping out History of timekeeping devices (my choice :) ) The articles are selected by the member list, so since we're on our second, it was my pick. The last one was AO's. The difference between this and a Wikiproject is that this is mainly a FA drive, whereas Wikiprojects focus on one topic. As you can see by our article list, we cover a broad range of topics. I believe it's open to Admins and Rollbackers who meet the criteria. You seem to! And your Featured content and GAs prior to this don't count towards the 20 (19 now). But we'd certainly like to have you with us! Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 16:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm neither an admin or a rollbacker so I think I'm excluded (and spend tooo much time here anyway) but good luck with your efforts.— Rod ^talk 16:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, wait, "Should be either an administrator or a rollbacker; if neither condition is met, user must have at least 1000 edits, and be in good standing." If you want, you could join. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 16:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

OK OK I've joined as Ive got a few more than the 1000 edits.— Rod ^talk 18:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Just a few. ;) Good to have you. · AndonicO ^Hail! 18:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Main Page date

Last time I checked, there was no article set for 18 June. Did someone ask Raul directly, or what? And what does the Battle of Waterloo have to do with anything? Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 16:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I've e-mailed him. · AndonicO ^Hail! 18:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Prior to this, or was that the reason why it was added? Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 19:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I e-mailed right after I saw you post about it here. He's not replied yet. · AndonicO ^Hail! 19:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 20:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Collab GA passed

History of timekeeping devices is now a GA. Good job, all. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 21:24, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yay! Back to work....it's a long road to FAC. ;) Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 00:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps we start up another collab... one that might more easily make it to FA, while working on HoTD? Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 02:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, IMO, we'll get this one there faster if we focus on it. We've got 9 currently working on it, I think that it may go faster than cannon, actually. Thoughts? Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 02:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it will take around the same time, maybe a little faster. History of timekeeping is much more expansive than cannon, in my opinion. bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 02:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

True, but we do have about twice the people working on it, so it should all work out. :) I like the idea of doing more core articles instead of out of the way things, any ideas? Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 02:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I definitely agree. I would, however, like a little change from all this history. Maybe a biology article? bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 03:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps something not as technical, though (not DNA replication...). I agree, history can be tiring, any suggestions? Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 12:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

It got to GA already?! I only managed to do some general tidy up and template fixing! (Does that still count?) To any: Is the ISBN finding part still open? I know it takes a long time, could anybody provide any links to good websites regarding finding the ISBN of a book? Thanks, The Helpful One ^(Review) 07:18, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Google books. Nearly all books are there. · AndonicO ^Hail! 08:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I did quite a few of the ISBNs but some pre 1970ish will not have them. I use Amazon to search for the books & then ISBN is displayed on the left. There is some discussion about the use of 10 digit v 13 digit isbns at present.— Rod ^talk 09:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, Google Books and Amazon it is :D The Helpful One ^(Review) 15:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I remember trying to find some ISBN for some ref, but I couldn't for the life of me do it. I could find the book, its prequels, its sequels, but no number. Infuriating! Is there a reverse search feature anywhere? Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 18:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Have a look at Wikipedia:ISBN & m:Help:ISBN links for some useful tools & depending on what you mean by reverse lookup try Special:Booksources.— Rod ^talk 18:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll check that out. BTW, is HoTD a DYK thing? I've been working on it since december, so it's not really a candidate. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 00:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

No, it's too old now, and it's been past the stub mark for some time. bibliomaniac15 Hey you! Stop lazing around and help fix this article instead! 01:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

History of timekeeping devices in Egypt was DYK today...yay us! Our first main page mention, with another one coming (hopefully) in June! Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 02:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I've put the page numbers on all the books for the Further Reading, and updated some ISBN tags as well. Is there anything else that I can do? --The Helpful One ^(Review) 15:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Right, I missed the "in Egypt" part. Well, good work. Now as for our next step, I think we need some basic expansion, especially in the actual timekeeping. Then we need to discuss a possible move or fork, before we really push for FA. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 16:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review

Hi everyone! I've just started the 2nd peer review of the collab, and we're already getting comments. I'd like some input on History of timekeeping vs. history of timekeeping devices, as we should remove the Sumer section if it's the latter -- the material is irrelevant and little remains of their devices. IMO we should have both articles, as the history of timekeeping discusses devices but also discusses calendars; another option would be history of calendars and history of timekeeping devices, limiting the former to physical calendars and stuff like the sexagesimal system, and limiting the latter to actual clocks/watches/etc. Thoughts? Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 03:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, that works, I'm going to start a sandbox for a possible History of timekeeping. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 16:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I've started a very stripped down version of HoTD to turn in to History of timekeeping here. From here, we might have to build from the ground up. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 16:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

No the current article is fine IMO, no need to start again. Just it needs a spitting, as Keilana said, or a more general scope. It'll be fine the way it is, starting again is just a waste of time and effort considering how much everyone has put in.--Phoenix-wiki 18:38, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, damn, it doesn't have to be the collab, just a side project for any interested. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 18:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The topics are too similar, they might as well be one article. · AndonicO ^Hail! 18:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Guys, I'm not trying to make an FA, it's just a fork. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 21:15, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know, but it shouldn't be forked, as they cover basically the same topic, with only a minor difference (actually, the "fork" should be longer than the FA hopeful, as it covers a wider topic, albeit by a little). · AndonicO ^Hail! 21:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Right. It's no big deal. If we don't make it into an article, it's at least a place to expand on the idea of timekeeping. We could use it as a sandbox or test place while the article undergoes major changes to FA. Justin^(Gmail?)_(u) 21:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Harry Potter GA Nomination

Hi there!

Just to let you know that I have nominated Harry Potter for GA, and it is currently being reviewed. For more information on the review, please see Talk:Harry_Potter#GA_Review.

Thanks,

The Helpful One ^(Review) 16:32, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The GA has passed! Harry Potter is now a GA article. The Helpful One ^(Review) 09:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations. :) · AndonicO ^Engage. 13:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Some loose ends

While the Squad improved Cannon to become its first FA, the other articles in the series on cannon were barely touched. Since we made so many improvements to the series' core article, it would probably be a good idea for someone to go over the other articles in the series and reconcile them with the work we did. This is mainly copyediting to make the text between the various articles agree; the reference sections, for example, can be improved immensely based on the work we did with sourcing in Cannon. I feel this would have to be done before Cannon goes onto the main page: it would be embarrassing if readers clicked onto a section's "main article" and found it wasn't quite up to the same standard. The two articles that overlap the most are Cannon in the Middle Ages and History of cannon. Naval artillery in the Age of Sail and English cannon could also do with some copyediting from Cannon. There's not much that could be moved to Cannon operation, but I feel it is the weakest article in the series relative to its importance.

Admittedly it is an unglamorous and thankless task, and I don't want to slow down the editing process for other articles. However, for whomsoever takes up this job ("in a wiki-mercenary-like manner"), barnstars may be in order. (Or maybe just a nice "thank you", if the Squad's goals are to be followed). --Grimhelm (talk) 23:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll do Middle Ages and History; I may have time early tomorrow or Sunday. · AndonicO ^Engage. 00:47, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I think I'll take List of cannon projectiles. bibliomaniac15 00:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

In light of Awadewit's really awesome peer review, and my business lately, I'm going to stick with HotkD, sorry. :( Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 01:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll send a few copyedits that way, as well. · AndonicO ^Engage. 01:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for showing some interest, but since it seems none of us have managed to make more than an edit or two, shall we leave this until History of timekeeping devices gets to FA status? --Grimhelm (talk) 19:18, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Eep, I had forgotten about that. :/ I'll copyedit History of cannon, but leave the rest until afterwards as you say. · AndonicO ^Engage. 19:25, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

...And I forgot again. Well, cannon will be on the main page the 19th of this month, so I'll definitely get to work. I'm writing this down somewhere this time... · AndonicO ^Engage. 15:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cannon in the Middle Ages nominated for Tzatzikification

I have nominated Cannon in the Middle Ages for Tzatzikification, to bring it up to a standard similar to our featured article on Cannon. I think we have to admit that it would never get done unless we included it in the list. ;-) We should aim for A-class, to keep it as an interesting side-project.

Over the past two days, I think I have done pretty much all that I can do myself with this article. I have brought in the relevant material from the sections on Middle East and Medieval Europe in cannon and standardised the list of references. Uncited statements have been tagged, and the lede rewritten to summarise the article. Of course, I also added some new sources and material: technological limitations, culverins, bombards, Russian cannon, etc. The areas that need to be worked on are in verifying tagged statements, finding page numbers for some of the references, and some general expansion of the article. The section on Early use in China and East Asia could also be improved from the section on Early history in cannon.

I look forward to seeing this article improved once we finish the collaboration on History of timekeeping devices.  :-) --Grimhelm (talk) 14:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Timekeeping collaboration

Way to go! I think that the timekeeping collab has yielded the most associated DYKs, including History of timekeeping devices in Egypt and Merkhet. I've also created the article for Liang Lingzan, so that's another redlink taken down. bibliomaniac15 Do I have your trust? 23:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cannon.

Now on the main page... for only 24 hours. Don't get too caught up. ;) · AndonicO ^Engage. 03:19, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I thought you might have wanted to see this

	Time Times
Issue Three • May 2008 • About the Newsletter Written by Zginder and Template Designed by Diligent Terrier
News Recent Project News Article count at 1074! At least 911 are unassessed though, plenty of work for us to do. Award offered—Since 2008-01-05, Sharkface217 has offered a Barnstar to the editor who can expand the article Timeline. It certainly needs it, now that it has been disambiguated from Chronology: Go to the Timeline listing on the Awards page to find out Sharkface's minimum requirements! From the Time Portal History of timekeeping devices reaches Good Article Status —On April 7 the history of time keeping article became a GA. This is our only top importance article to reach this prestigious status. This was only possible with the dedication of the Tzatziki Squad. They are continuing to work on the article to reach Feature Article status. History of timekeeping devices in Egypt was a DYK —The article appeared on the Main Page on April 8. With this text: "...that despite Herodotus's claim that the sundial was invented in Babylon, the oldest known example is from Egypt?" This also was only possible thanks to the Tzatziki Squad. Recent Time News None that I know of.
Archives • Newsroom
If you no longer wish to longer recieve this newsletter, please add your name here. Newsletter delivered by {{{Delivered by}}}.

Giving us credit eh? Thanks. :) I'll be back full time soon, to help with Hotd (haven't been able to do much :( ). *gets back to work* · AndonicO ^Engage. 12:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

A-status for HoTD is also underway. It looks like we're almost there. bibliomaniac15 19:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] History of timekeeping devices.

I'm working on some organizational changes here; it's a mess right now though, needs transitions... if this turns out alright, I'll leave another note here, and maybe we can implement the changes into the main article. · AndonicO ^Engage. 13:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)