Wikipedia:WikiProject Featured articles/FA-Team/Mission Proposals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
1


This is the proposal page for articles to be taken on as FA-Team missions. If anyone has an article that they think would fit the scope of the project, please add it here. Keep in mind that we are primarily looking for:

  • Articles written by groups of editors with little-to-no FA experience (e.g., a new or recently-reactivated WikiProject).
  • Articles where much of the researched content is already in place.
  • Articles that already have a group of editors keen to improve their quality.

Remember:

  • The FA-team doesn't "do" research.
  • The FA-team mostly deals with reviewing, copy-editing, MoS-ifying, guiding through FAC, and some other top-secret stuff we cannot disclose at this time :)
  • Please include a deadline; the FA-Team will only take on projects so long as at some point, as in every good James Bond movie, they end up racing against a ticking time-bomb.

When at least three of the FA-Team members commit to an article proposed on this page, then it will be moved at dead of night to Mission 3: Save Wikipedia from Itself. Once an article has been accepted, its editors are then bound to utmost loyalty, a vow of silence, and the nearest set of railroad tracks.

If you have a multiple-article proposal, then that can become a mission of its own.

Example:

===Article name here===

  • Editors/Wikiproject(s) involved:
  • This would be suitable for the FA-team because...
  • Goal(s)
  • Deadline(s):

Contents

[edit] Proposals

[edit] Everglades et al

  • Editors/Wikiproject(s) involved: User:Moni3
  • I need help, but not just yet. Ok, well ... soon nowish. Everglades is not yet ready for an FA review. But I have written Indigenous people of the Everglades region, Geography and ecology of the Everglades, Draining and development of the Everglades, and my next yet hopefully last will be Restoration of the Everglades, though I'm not ruling out having to write another. I'd like to bring all to FA. With each, I've added to the main Everglades article that continues to grow. I have concerns about copy editing: I'm writing each in about a week and it's quite fatiguing. I'm also concerned about the overall comprehensiveness of the main article. I'm not too excited about the repetition from the satellite articles, but I'm not sure right now about what to do about that. It seems the WP:FLORIDA and WP:Environment aren't too active right now - I've contacted both projects. So I think it's a worthy subject to take on, obviously. I would appreciate guidance and input in whatever anyone can do. If you have questions, come see me on my talk page. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 00:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
All articles posted. I'll put Restoration of the Everglades up for peer review and GA review. --Moni3 (talk) 04:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
This is my master plan. Let's see if it goes agley...
The order of articles I would like to bring to FA are:
  1. Indigenous people of the Everglades region (GA passed)
  2. Geography and ecology of the Everglades
  3. Draining and development of the Everglades
  4. Restoration of the Everglades
  5. Everglades
  • I am concerned that the content overlaps and some information may not be clear in the individual articles, or on the other hand, detail is extraneous or common sense.
  • As ever, I'm concerned that what makes perfect sense in my head rings like the rantings of someone barely familiar with English.
  • I would like the information in the Everglades article to be somewhat original, though I have lifted chunks of text from the satellites. I will probably rewrite parts of it just so readers won't think they've already come across the information.
  • I am worried that the Everglades article will parallel the length and scope of Roman Catholic Church, and turn people off with its weight and scientific stuff.
  • For content, I would like to contact the Everglades Coalition, a group of conservation organizations, and the University of Florida Everglades Institute. Both will be politically motivated (Everglades Institute works to grow better sugarcane) and some pretty strong edits may come to the article. I may need help with balance. On the other hand, they may totally ignore it, so if balance is already an issue, please let me know. Anything anyone on the team can do, please do. I appreciate your assistance. --Moni3 (talk) 14:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
  1. Support - Awadewit (talk) 23:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
  2. Commit to a one-time strenuous copyedit. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 16:44, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment I think that this is clearly a candidate for a multiple-article mission, if enough FA-Team members can commit to it. Unfortunately, right now I feel unable to commit, though I'm happy to be called in occasionally to help with a copy-edit or whatever. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  3. Support Will help starting now. RC-0722 361.0/1 18:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
    • OK, I think that this has been accepted. I've added it as Mission 4, and encourage individual editors to sign up to particular articles; general Everglades talk can then take place on the mission 4 talk page. If I knew how to do one of those "this discussion is archived" boxes, or similar, then I'd do it here. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 09:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A little help with Problem of Apollonius

Willow has done a great job with this and is getting ready to submit it to WP:FAC. I haven't reviewed a math article on WP before, but I have some relevant experience. I've love to get some feedback from the FA Team to my copyedit questions here. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 15:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh right. "This is suitable for the FA Team because:" The sense I get from reading all the glowing things said about Willow is that she does a fantastic job and can really crank out the articles on a variety of subjects when she can get a little help. If she has to do every little thing herself, it slows her down. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 17:09, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
It looks like we have this one covered, it's looking very good. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 16:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

A lot of work has been done on this one since my copyedit, and it could probably use another set of eyes. If I understand our new magic formula, we get to take credit for saving Wikipedia from itself whenever 3 clan members commit to doing so...Willow is still chugging along and I gave it a copyedit, do I hear a third? - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 16:48, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

  1. Commit to an additional one-time strenuous copyedit.- Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 16:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

As always, I'd be grateful for some help, and Dan's been a saint helping out. But honestly? I think Moni's Everglades articles promise to be more fun, more important and a much better match for the FA-Team's dazzling spectrum of talents. :) I'm helping out a little there as well! Like the MMM, it feels like it has the right scale; it's a broader canvas than a single article and one where each member of the FA-Team can find their niche. (New FA-T motto: "We squeeze ourselves into a ball and roll ourselves towards overwhelming questions." ;) You'll have the most devoted collaborator in Moni; my only fear is that she'll be overwhelmed with 10 of us giving suggestions at once on five articles and only one of her to address them. But perhaps she can recruit ecologists and other devoted people to help her? With her, I think anything's possible. :) The broad scope and many-to-many relationship of the MMM Project (many students to many FA Team members) helped it succeed, I think. Willow (talk) 09:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Willow, I'm hoping that it need not be either/or. See my recent proposal here. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 09:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, jb. I would be grateful for some help, especially in catching small errors and also in making the article more accessible, but I really do think that everyone's time would be better spent on the Everglades articles. I glanced at your suggestion page, and it seems good! But I'm too tired to think about it properly just now; I got up only because I needed to take care of something un-wiki and now I'm going to crash again. zzzzzzzzzz.... 3) Willow (talk) 09:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Adam Smith

Some editors of the Economics Wikiproject are trying our best to bring Adam Smith up to FA status. Any help you could lend would be most appreciated. Remember (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

In response, my suggestion below:
In my opinion this is a good candidate. The article is in good shape but FAT members will soon see that the lead is too short, that too many long quotes are used in places. They could copyedit, format, etc. They could open a peer review and submit (if it hasn't been done) and review for Good Article status to create some targets. The help is needed soon, not in several weeks' time when the Economics Team's group effort may be past its peak. qp10qp (talk) 12:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
  1. Commit to a one-time strenuous copyedit. Great article, and perfect for our times. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 16:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  2. Commit I originally helped to initiate this drive at WP:ECON/FAD, so I would definitely like to see this taken on. Gary King (talk) 18:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  3. Support - Will do peer review today. Awadewit (talk) 15:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I've added this as mission 5 and myself as the mission coordinator. Awadewit (talk) 17:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] General proposal

I admired your work on MMM from afar and have a general suggestion. At Peer review I see several requests each week that are either near ready for FAC or have recently failed FAC (FLC too), but just need some polish (copyedit and MOS issues). These are articles that seem to already have all the facts in place, just need some help. I am not sure if this is what you are looking for, but if it is let me know and I can provide more details. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)