Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Archive 5

message: We have, if I recall correctly, two things that are going forward close to the end of the month:
; Tag & Assess 2007 : This is, if I understood what Roger had in mind, going to be widely publicized coincident with the October newsletter.  We still need an actual announcement to put in the newsletter, but I think everything else is set up now.
:Done below. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 09:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that about covers it. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Looks good. Cla68 02:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Cool. We probably need the tags in two columns: the first the task force name, the second the tag. (Some of them aren't obvious.) --ROGER DAVIES TALK 09:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  End-of-month plans 

message: Here's the draft. It's the bit between the horizontal rules. If we can go for a picture version, we don't need to do the separate mail out (700+ names!!!!) that Tigre suggested. If it doesn't fit into the newsletter format, perhaps it could be posted as a separate section at the same time as the newsletter goes out. (Killing two birds with one stone, huh?). 
-------------
-------------
750px
What's Tag & Assess MMVII? We'd better explain. A month or so back, we ran a script to list all the articles in categories related to military history. This gave us about 165,000 articles. Some of these are already tagged and assessed as military history; some are military history but not yet tagged and assessed; some are not military history articles at all. This huge project - working thorough 165,000 articles - is called Tag & Assess 2007. To make it manageable, the list has been broken down into 330 ranges each of 500 articles. This is where you can help.
Just... adopt-a-range from the available worklists then keep track of your tally on participants' list. The tagging is easy, just follow the simple instructions. Afterwards, as our way of thanking you, you'll be presented with service awards and barnstars based on the number of articles you process. Remember... the ranges are broken down into sub-sections of ten articles, so you work through them at twenty or thirty articles a day if you wish. To make Tag & Assess 2007 a success, we need your help. Please sign up now. Thanks.
Image:Wiki-stripe1.svg
Image:Wiki-stripe2.svg
Image:Wiki-stripe3.svg
Image:Tireless_Contributor_Barnstar.gif
Image:Working Wikimedian's Barnstar.png
Image:Barnstar_of_Diligence.png
Image:Bronzewiki_2.png
Image:Silverwiki_2.png
Image:Goldenwiki_2.png
-------------
-------------
;Comments
#It would be nice if the gallery weren't so deep. I'd prefer less dead space top and bottom but I don't know how to do it (or if it can be done). 
#I think we DO need a 5000+ articles award. Cromdog has done 1200 in a couple of days and we still have 80 days to go!
--ROGER DAVIES TALK 09:10, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a possibility. I was thinking of something along the lines of the Pour le Mérite. We can easily add bits to it then if someone goes and does, say, 10,000. :)) --ROGER DAVIES TALK 16:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's possible, but I'd recommend against using real-life awards.  The odds of unintentionally offending someone with the Blue Max are admittedly lower than if we were using, say, the Ritterkreuz; but, still, I don't think the risk is worth it. Kirill 17:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  True enough though I was thinking of something very loosely based on it. The basic Maltese cross shape is used by loads of different countries. By the way, for 5000, were you thinking of WikiChevrons PLUS Epic Barnstar?  --ROGER DAVIES TALK 17:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Either, actually; picking one would allow us to use the other one for a 10,000 award, incidentally. Kirill 17:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Okay, I've added the ad to the newsletter: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Outreach/Newsletter October 2007.  Comments would be appreciated; mainly, does the format work? Kirill 00:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, works well, I think. The only change might be to center the pictures though I'm looking at it on a 21" screen with the window full out so it's difficult to judge what it would look like on a smaller one. I'll be guided by you on that, Kirill :) --ROGER DAVIES TALK 01:31, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Newsletter: Tag & Assess 2007 ad draft

message: What's next guys? Shall we move on? -- FayssalF - Wiki me up®  12:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we can go with some manner of old FA reworking contest once the assessment drive has stabilized.  That'll probably keep us busy until January-ish, at which point we could come back and deal with the vital articles matter, if we want to. Kirill 13:23, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What's next?

message: I noticed that the awards page now lists the three new sub-chevrons created by Roger Davies with the description "They are awarded to recognize contributions to specific project tasks and drives as may be announced from time to time." As such, I was wondering if there would be any interest in awarding the one and two chevron versions to editers who contribute to our articles that are listed under the Peer Review and A-class review sections. My hope here is that by regularly issueing these awards only under those circumstances we may encourage other contributers to become more involved with the process and thus cut down on the amount of "A-class review/Peer Review for (article) needs attention" messages on the main project page and task force pages. Note that this would not impede the abilty of the project to award these three service awards under assessment drive conditions. Comments on this idea, anyone? TomStar81 (Talk) 07:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 09:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, good idea.  Would it be worthwhile to substitute a different image into the roundel for these, or should we just use the same one we have for the drive? Kirill 15:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a bad idea at all and I can easily design something ... though we'll all start looking like banana republic generals if we have too many. The big advantage of the wikistripes is that they incorporate a sort of barnstar. Incidentally, when is the October newsletter likely to go out? I was aiming to sync the announcements in other wikiprojects to it. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 16:39, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It'll need a final update on October 1 (the contest results); after that, it's as soon as Grafikm runs the bot. Kirill 16:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, it's done and in Grafikm's hands now; we can probably proceed with the external advertising as well. Kirill 00:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Good idea Tom. -- FayssalF - Wiki me up®  23:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Good point, Kirill. In that case I suppose a visual redesign is in order. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:17, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

text: If I understand this correctly, the proposal is for one, two and three stripe versions for each review level? ie nine new awards in total? Also are these for the reviewer or the reviewee? --ROGER DAVIES TALK 05:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not as I understand it; from where I sit it would just eb a redesign of the existing 1,2, and 3 chevron assessment awards. That may not even be nessicary -- If we create clasps for A-class, Peer Review, and Featured Article Candidacy then we can keep the same awards and use the clasps to denote what action prompted an award. Again, just a thought. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah clasps again. How are we seeing these working? As part of a two-part award ie here's the standard stripe and here's a separate graphic of the clasp to go with it? --ROGER DAVIES TALK 11:03, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a way to generate overlaid images that could be used to actually place the clasp on top of the normal award; I'll have to see if I can find the code that does it. Kirill 15:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If this can be done it's an excellent solution and meets my objections.--ROGER DAVIES TALK 08:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I was thinking of having only three new awards rather than nine; they'd be awarded interchangeably for participation in any review process.  I don't really see the benefit of having different awards for each type of review. Kirill 15:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur with Kirill. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Ditto. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 08:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Something like this? This is not the final thing by the way, just a quick dummy done in Paint. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 19:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks nice, although the puzzle piece is a somewhat unexpected choice for something like this (variations on the magnifying glass being a more common symbol for review processes). Kirill 00:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But, bizarrely enough, it seems we have been pre-empted: WT:MILHIST#Template:ContentReviewMedal. ;-) Kirill 01:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bizarrely but conveniently :) --ROGER DAVIES TALK 12:34, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should we just adopt it for our own use, then, or do we want to continue developing a different award? Kirill 16:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless anyone strongly objects, adopt it, I'd say. It's very well designed and will be a commonly recognized standard. --ROGER DAVIES TALK 18:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur. No need to expend energy on a new design if we already have an existing design. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposal for A-class and Peer Review awards