Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Unreferenced articles

message: Greetings everyone,
The February 2024 (FEB24) backlog drive for WikiProject Unreferenced articles has officially concluded, and I am thrilled to announce the remarkable progress we have achieved together. Our goal for this drive was to bring the backlog down to below 100,000 articles, and I'm proud to say that we succeeded, reaching 97,343 articles—a significant decrease of 14,300 articles from the starting point of 111,643.
I extend my heartfelt appreciation to all participants for their dedication and hard work. Awards have been distributed to recognize each participant's invaluable contributions.
Special recognition is due to @JTtheOG, who secured first place with an impressive 1431 points, @Lacanthrope, who earned second place with 1345 points, and @Egeymi, who demonstrated exceptional commitment in third place with 925 points.
With the drive concluded, the drive page has been archived. The users who helped organize this drive are @CactiStaccingCrane, @ARandomName123, @Broc, and @Kazamzam. I also played a small part in organizing the drive. Now, we are eager to hear your feedback on the drive and any suggestions you may have for future initiatives. Your input will help us improve and plan more effective drives in the future.
Thank you all for your tireless efforts in enhancing the reliability and quality of Wikipedia. – DreamRimmer (talk) 13:31, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations all 👏👏👏 //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 23:23, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Thank you to everyone, especially the organisers. This was a really exciting drive, and I thoroughly enjoyed it!  I've since signed up for the WikiProject, if others might be interested in joining me! IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 00:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Thanks everyone for their hard work and dedication. I agree with Ignatius that this was lots of fun, and if there's another drive sometime in the future I'd be more than keen to participate again. ― novov (t c) 08:33, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

text: I forgot to mention in the previous message that 292 users signed up for this drive, and 218 users received awards for sourcing unsourced articles. These numbers are quite impressive, and to the best of my knowledge, they represent the highest participation we've seen in any drive thus far. – DreamRimmer (talk) 08:48, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

text: It was great! Let's make this a regular thing :)) — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 17:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

text: It was a party! See you all at the 2040 drive for articles with only one source :D //Replayful (talk | contribs) 17:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  😂😂😂 Lookin forward to it. JTtheOG (talk) 18:11, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the future that I'm looking for :) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 06:27, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The [[WP:FEB24|February 2024 (FEB24)]] drive has officially concluded 

message: :Category:Articles lacking sources from March 2024 has less articles than :Category:Articles lacking sources from February 2024! This might be a bit ambitious, but could we manage to axe the March 2024 beast in this month? CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 06:19, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh, only 91 articles? That's actually pretty impressive, and axing it definitely possible, as long as people continue to work on it. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me!  18:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm working on it too. We soon need to form an alliance with NPP and AFC, just saying :) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 17:36, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Oh, looks like the dream is dead (for now). There's been a big uptick in new additions over the last few days, and now we're sitting at nearly 500. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me!  15:32, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

text: On March 1 and 2, I was trying to patrol the category and made great headway. I've probably knocked at least 30-40 out. A lot of the 'discovered' unsourced articles are sort of in batches of related articles, probably mass created... if we can find a good source for one of them, that should make serious progress on the category. ForksForks (talk) 01:57, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we should ask Wikipedia:WikiProject Handball for help? They are only semi-active but there are very many unreferenced handball articles in there at the moment! Turtlecrown (talk) 23:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Killing [[:Category:Articles lacking sources from March 2024]] 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § Depreciating new unsourced articles.  CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 07:01, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at [[:Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Depreciating new unsourced articles|Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) §&nbsp;Depreciating new unsourced articles]]

message: Happy spring, party people! I hope everyone is doing swimmingly.
* Headline: As a result of the first annual drive, which was a smash success, we have cleared 18,096 articles between today and January 4th, the equivalent of what we might do in ~9 months (based on previous averages). For yourself and your fellow editors, please clap.
* Highlights: All categories from October 2007 to May 2008 have been emptied! We are finally down to backlog that is less than 16 years and below 100,000 unreferenced articles for the first time...well, since we went over 100,000 articles.  
* Low-hanging fruit: June 2008 is hovering at an enticing 88 articles left, a very lucky number.
* High-hanging fruit: Everyone's favourite BFC (Big Friendly Category), December 2009, is a willowy 12,925 articles as of this writing - half the calories, but just as much body as the original. The other high-hanging fruit are, still, the Frustrating Five (name open for revision): February 2016 (921), April 2019 (1095), May 2019 (2250), June 2019 (4699), and September 2020 (1432); September 2020 had the lowest percentage of change from January to April. Godspeed to anyone working on these.
* Announcements: The village pump discussion started by comrade in arms @CactiStaccingCrane is ongoing, see above.
* Results: July 2012 edged out August 2012, 534 to 539. 
* New challenge: not one, not two, but THREE ties: September/October 2010 (314); April/May 2012 (364); and September/October 2018 (395). Some kind of triple Jellybean (my cat) in a hat prize awaits the person who tips all three of these.
Happy editing and for everyone watching the solar eclipse, please remember to wear eye protection! Best,  Kazamzam (talk) 19:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @Kazamzam, please remove the old signature and add a new one with the current timestamp :) – DreamRimmer (talk) 17:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

text: the village pump proposal you mentioned above doesn't work for me. is it still open? --Engineerchange (talk) 18:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @Engineerchange, It’s still open. See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Deprecating new unsourced articles. – DreamRimmer (talk) 18:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see; there was just a spelling error in the above one: :Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Deprecating new unsourced articles ("Depreciating" vs. "Deprecating") --Engineerchange (talk) 18:33, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

text: @Kazamzam Nice. The consensus around that discussion seems to be draftifying articles, so I will propose that articles should be formally draftify if they don't have an inline source. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  April 2024 

message: Does anyone know why all these talk pages of referenced articles are showing as unreferenced articles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Unreferenced_Ecuador_articles? And how we can address it? Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 19:36, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @Boleyn - it's part of the project banner text    We would, I believe, need to go in and address each one manually. Doable if time-consuming. Kazamzam (talk) 19:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Could we get an AWB run or bot to automatically add the  to all articles with the unref=yes but without any tag on the main page? ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me!  20:03, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @Boleyn - the issue is that the tags are often outdated and some of them now have references, so that would likely be very unproductive. Kazamzam (talk) 21:15, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Ecuador

message: Is there any guidance on whether or not unreferenced articles should have: "==References==, "? It's pretty convenient not having to type it out, especially if I'm using the visual editor. ARandomName123 (talk)  22:54, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I see people add these in relatively often. Sometimes the random article patrollers that add unreferenced tags to stuff throw them on. I don't really ever see people removing them, so I assume it's okay to do if you want. ForksForks (talk) 01:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

text: I add them, as when looking through to add references, I am looking for easy references to add, and to see if there is a references section. This way at least one is completed, even if I struggle with the references themselves. I have had them removed by a couple of editors just seeing it as an empty section, though for me this is an essential section awaiting completion, as opposed to an unneeded section. Boleyn (talk) 13:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

text: I think somebody already suggested this, but I can't remember where: it'd be great if  on a page with no references displayed something useful. "This article does not contain any inline citations or footnotes. Please help improve this article by adding some" – something like that. – Joe (talk) 10:03, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I really like this suggestion, @Joe Roe! Broc (talk) 15:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Followed up at Template talk:Reflist#Making empty reflists useful. – Joe (talk) 08:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

text: I've been removing these because I don't think they help readers and could cause confusion. The idea to make  smarter may help. In the meantime, there is  which has a  option that could help with sourcing. ~Kvng (talk) 22:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Empty references sections? 

message: It would be great if there's like a government source that has a list of villages. That way I don't need to search for eternity for sources for each villages. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 15:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: National or even state-level information on villages is difficult (see this article on lacking village data). I usually search the district's website using a Google "site:" search. Turtlecrown (talk) 18:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian villages 

message: Can someone help me find sources for: BacklogKiller (talk) 13:00, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I did try with this one but found it difficult too. Boleyn (talk) 12:04, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help 

message: Just awarded some citation barnstars to @Turtlecrown, @Cocobb8, and @Boleyn for their work on Category:Articles lacking sources from August 2008 (which is down to 3). Who am I missing? Cielquiparle (talk) 17:29, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you! We were missing you -  Turtlecrown (talk) 11:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Subject matter expertise is greatly appreciated, and one-off contributions are often huge and Barnstar-worthy as well. Hoping for someone who is mathematics-savvy like @XOR'easter to weigh in on finding a reference for everyone's favorite Degenerate bilinear form. Cielquiparle (talk) 12:11, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

text: Thanks, ! Boleyn (talk) 19:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: A shout out as well to all the unsung heroes who are quietly contributing to the total count of ~200 referenced articles per day (regardless of when they were first tagged). Cielquiparle (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who else needs barnstars?