Category talk:Articles that need to be wikified/Archive 2

message: I always have a hard time finding this category because I can't remember the exact name, confusing it with :Category:articles needing to be wikified and stuff like that.  I think it would be helpful to new users to create category redirects using  so this place is easier to find.  But for some reason I have it in my mind that you're not supposed to do that except when you really need to.  Does anyone think this wouldn't be an ok thing to do?  Also, I thought of making a redirect from places like Wikipedia:articles that need to be wikified, another one I frequently accidentally go to, but I also have it in my mind that you shouldn't make redirects across namespaces.  Can anyone tell me if I should go ahead and make these redirects?  I think if it's not too harmful, it should be done to make Wikipedia as un-frustrating for new users to navigate <edit> as possible.  Thanks in advance, delldot | talk 23:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the bugs relating to category redirects have been fixed.  I went ahead and created these as regular redirects.  Feel free to do the same with other permutations. -- Beland 00:33, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Category redirects?

message: This is not going well, is it? It's a pretty easy task, but it appears not enough people are doing it. If every editor would just do 1 or 2 articles, it would be finished soon enough. Any ideas to get more people involved? Piet 21:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One way I've been advertising the articles needing wikified is using The Category Tree to search for "Articles that need to be wikified" within another category eg. "Anime" or "Computer and video games" and then adding the articles found to associated WikiProject "to do" lists etc. Maybe some other WikiProjects can be brought into this? - Phorque 18:30, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help needed 

message: attempted to wikify, please check and remove wikify if it's ok. --naught101 23:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To be done: add to one or more categories, use == headings instead of =, maybe more links to other articles (where relevant), if possible add ==See also== section, ==External links== section, ==References==. References are important. Piet 09:04, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Non-renewable resources]]

message: What are you mean't to do when wikifying smaller articles (ones which are too small to have an introductory paragraph and a decent structure)?  Do you just add links, make sure it's tone is like an encyclopedia, and add a stub template, or is there anything else to do? --PhiJ 18:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's pretty much it, assuming it's not a copyright violation and doesn't need to be deleted.  Goes pretty fast with small articles. -- Beland 19:02, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Smaller Articles

message: I ordered the subcategories by date by adding a letter after the asterisk in their category links. For example, *A. The newer categories have a lower number in the alphabet, so they come after the older ones. When a new month is created, just add the next letter in the alphabet. The letters will have to be rotated in about 19 months, although you could add a second letter instead. -- Kjkolb 10:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The standard technique for doing this is simply to encode the date in the sortkey.  For example, "January 2006" would get the sortkey "2006-01".  It's kinda neat and probably easier to maintain that way.  -- Beland 05:43, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subcategory ordering 

message: Now that articles are sorted by date, most wikifying will be concentrated on the oldest articles and the recent ones that have not been sorted yet. You may want to use the  tag to avoid edit conflicts, especially on articles that need a lot of work. -- Kjkolb 17:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Avoiding edit conflicts 

message: I prefered the old colours... --Tango 19:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Progress bar colours 

message: Many articles here are obvious candidates for deletion. Do we retain the  tag when applying , ,  etc.? I think we should not, as this will save later Wikifiers some mis-clicks on articles that are headed to oblivion, and if deletion fails,  will get mostly re-added anyway (or won't it?) Sandstein 16:18, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is easier to leave the wikify tag in place, so if the article is not deleted it will definately remain tagged, and if it is deleted, well then the problem has gone away. Martin 16:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does deletion override {{tl|wikify}}? 

message: Is anyone creating a bot to monitor the progress bar? It shouldn't be a difficult implementation. cBuckley (Talk • Contribs) 23:47, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot for progress bar? 

message: In the last few days an enormous number of articles have been tagged as needing wikifying, resulting in the number remaining increasing by a few hundred.  Also, the March total went up, which probably indicates I made a mistake on it last time, but on the scale of the May increase, it's not significant.  We now have over 7000 articles to wikify... Does anyone know why so many articles were added this week? --Tango 16:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't worry, soon all the articles that need wikifikation will be tagged, then the only new ones will be new articles. At which point we should start to see the categories start to decrease in size quite substantially. Martin 16:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's been a drive to tag old articles, or something? The increase in the first week of this month has been more than in previous weeks. --Tango 17:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps strange corners of Wikipedia have received attention recently? For example: Wikipedia:Dead-end pages consists entirely of articles which need to be wikified. Fake User 06:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh dear...