Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 9

message: I think we need to step back here... the problem Gurubramhma brount up was too many noms not getting selected. But a week ago we had a drought, and we deliberately slowed the update rate down significantly to compensate... So what's the real problem here? Maybe it isn't what we think it is.  	 
 
Also... While I'm all in favour of process improvement, one thing I've learned in my 25+ years of professional experience is, don't optimise the stuff that doesn't matter. Find where the bulk of the time is spent, and optimise that. The bulk seems to be in the picking the articles itself process, at least for me. Perhaps others can post their timings to the same level of detail to see if their bulk of time is where mine is. If others can efficiently pick noms faster than 15-25 min, I want to adopt their process. If others spend more than 2 min on posting notices to article talk pages, lothers should adopt MY process, and so forth. Sparring around about what we should do may be pointless without measurements ++Lar: t/c 19:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  what problem are we trying to solve here 

message: As suggested, my method and approximate times follow. I don't use the warning templates or the staging area, I just prepare everything in my text editor (blatant plug) in advance and then bung it in the template, deal with the talk page and fire out the notifications. Typical order and timings:
#Review articles and images for selection. Check articles for quality, length, date of creation, correct author, stated fact is mentioned etc. Copy and paste to text editor. (15-20 mins).
#Prepare draft template entry in text editor, paste into template and preview, compare length versus current template content and likely size on the main Page. Paste old entries to text editor for archiving later. (5 mins).
#Protect the selected image (1 min - 5 mins (if uploading from commons))
#Save the new items to the template and purge to update the Main Page.
#Update the talk page refresh clock, add old items to the archive, remove promoted items from the suggestions area, unprotect or delete the previously featured image (5 mins).
#Place DYK notices on article talk pages, creators talk pages and nominators talk pages (5 - 10 mins).
#Done, have a cup of coffee (5 mins).
Hope that helps. --Cactus.man ✍ 13:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cactus.man's method and time

message: Joseph Krumgold, which is on DYK now, has well under 1000 characters/bytes (if you ignore the list of works). Should we be including such lists in determining whether an article is long enough? — BRIAN0918 • 2006-06-22 13:46
:I think it's reasonable to evaluate lists as part of the article, as they are kind of content. I saw your comment to that effect on the nom, thought about it, looked at the article, and felt it was a good enough article (including the list) to warrant selection.  IIRC we have selected actual LIST articles in the past, but I may be mistaken. I'm interested in what others think, and if it's a bad practice, would be happy to see it added to the guidelines, but I fear instruction creep as it's rather a small point... Thoughts? ++Lar: t/c 14:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lists in articles