Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles

This WikiProject is believed to be inactive.

Consider looking for related projects for help or ask at the Teahouse.
If you are not currently a project participant and wish to help you may still participate in the project. This status should be changed if collaborative activity resumes.

Discussion on good articles now takes place at WT:GA and WT:GAN.

WikiProject Good articles was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 18 September 2013.

WikiProject Good articles was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 24 September 2014.

Shortcut

WT:WPGA

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5

This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by .

improving my article

Hello everybody, this Walt . I am trying to improve my article, I expect some basic tips and recommendation.

https://en.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Draft:Masterwork_Cymbals#draft_of_Masterwork_cymbals

Featured quality source review RFC

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --Izno Repeat (talk) 21:39, 11 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WugBot update

Hi all, I've started testing a new version of WugBot that should improve the way the GA Report gets updated. The changes are mostly behind the scenes, but you'll notice a few minor changes on the front end. Firstly, the bot should have better error handling and so the "Malformed Nominations" section will be far more reliable than previously. Secondly the main categories in the "Summary" section now show the total count of nominations in all its subcategories. Third the number of nominations a nominator in the "... Multiple .." section has is no longer in bold. The test version can be seen at User:Wugapodes/GANReportBotTest and will be updated at the same time as the regular report. Feel free to look it over and let me know if you see any problems that come up. The test will run for at least a week while I work out some final bugs. I'll update this thread when the switch is made.

On another note there is a discussion at GAN about splitting the biology and medicine category. An apparent problem is that Legobot probably can't handle that change and updates seem unlikely. If there's consensus for splitting that category I'd be willing to take over that task from Legoktm and make the needed changes. Comments on this are welcome. Wugapodes [t^hɑk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɹɪbz] 03:25, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the bot. The report should be updated in a few hours by the new version, let me know if you see any problems. Wugapodes [t^hɑk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɹɪbz] 19:11, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Should we mark this project as inactive/defunct?

Hi all. It looks like there's not much traffic at this project page anymore, and instead conversations related to the GA process broadly are happening at Wikipedia talk:Good articles or Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations. Should we mark this project as inactive/defunct and leave a note at the top directing folks to one of those pages? Ajpolino (talk) 20:36, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done This seems uncontroversial. I've left a note redirecting folks to WT:GA and WT:GAN. Thanks all. Ajpolino (talk) 17:07, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]