Wikipedia:Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive: Difference between revisions

The Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive is a fortnightly collaboration to improve articles to featured article status.

/History - For past collaborations.

/Removed - For removed nominations.

/Maintenance - ACID upkeep.

Though this project is inactive, you can help with : Michael Nunes (actor) (random unreferenced BLP of the day for 13 Oct 2024 - provided by User:AnomieBOT/RandomPage via WP:RANDUNREF).

To vote or nominate you have to be a registered user with at least one contribution that is not a vote. Anyone who does so is encouraged to make at least one edit per vote or nomination to the currently chosen article, Michael Nunes (actor) (random unreferenced BLP of the day for 13 Oct 2024 - provided by User:AnomieBOT/RandomPage via WP:RANDUNREF). Any and all articles may be nominated except:

• Articles that are currently at featured status
• Articles in edit wars

==={{la|Article}}===
{{acid|start=October 13, 2024|votes=1}}
<!-- Remember to update the vote counter when you place your vote! -->
; Support:
# ~~~~

; Comments:
* (put your reason for nomination) --~~~~

----

{{ACIDnom}}

Sign with "# ~~~~" on the end of the list of the article you want to vote for and then update the vote count in the subhead. Opposing votes are not counted; see approval voting. You can vote for as many articles as you like. Additionally you can give a comment in the comment section; use terms such as appalling and shocking sparingly, remember that every editor that has ever edited a nominated article probably did so to the best of his of her ability.

Article with the most votes every two weeks or so is selected as "The current Article Improvement Drive article". If two articles have same number of votes, the nominee with the higher number of hits per day over the previous month wins. The following template:

{{Template:ACIDcur}}

is placed atop the article talk page.

Nominated articles remain on this page for three "selections", after which that article entry is removed from and moved to the page for removed nominations.

New nominations go *AT THE BOTTOM* :-)

30 votes, Nominated April 7, 2007; needs at least 32 votes by June 2, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Themcman1 15:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Dalf | Talk 02:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. M&NCenarius 04:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. SpLoT // 15:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. mirageinred 20:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 17:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. — Pious7_Talk^Contribs 03:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. --Mars2035 03:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. LordHarris 14:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. Darrenhusted 16:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Astrowob 14:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. bibliomaniac15 22:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
13. ♠TomasBat (@)(Contribs)(Sign!) 21:08, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. Dweller 10:53, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
15. — Jack · talk · 06:11, Wednesday, 25 April 2007
16. RazorICE 09:21, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
17. Aminz 04:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
18. i kan reed 21:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
19. CG 12:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
20. Flubeca 19:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
21. Mrmoocow 23:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
22. --~KnowledgeHegemony~ 08:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
23. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 22:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
24. Kyoko 12:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
25. Ehjort 21:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
26. Hydrogen Iodide 07:18, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
27. --Wafulz 16:02, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
28. Sportsjam3 17:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
29. jwillbur^talk 00:39, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
30. DSachan 19:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• One of the most important subjects, with one of the best portals, but the article is not great, without many citations. Themcman1 15:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Articles on general topics, like this one, often get overlooked. However, I think that people are more likely to look up science than many specific scientific artices that are featured. — Pious7_Talk^Contribs 03:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

26 votes, Nominated April 22, 2007; needs at least 28 votes by June 10, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. S.Örvarr.S 07:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Max Naylor 19:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. BorgQueen 00:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Michkalas 08:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Dalf | Talk 21:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Io 03:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. M&NCenarius 23:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Patricknoddy^{TALK (reply here)|HISTORY} 11:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Aelffin 17:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. D. Webb 18:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Kaiser matias 20:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. Ciacchi 21:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
13. Daniel Bryant 00:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. Jxn 01:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
15. Enlil Ninlil 05:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
16. Caponer 15:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
17. icelandic hurricane #12 _(talk) 11:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
18. Felix 12:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
19. Crushti 19:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
20. Vegfarandi Vegfarandi 10:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
21. Switchercat ^talk_cont 11:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
22. Ég er Almar 03:14, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
23. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 23:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
24. Darrenhusted 20:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
25. Eric Bronder 16:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
26. Bifgis 20:14, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• OK: this article needs some attention. There is much more that can be said about the language, and a plethora of useful suggestions have come in after a peer review for how we can improve the article. I’ve tried as much as I can, but I can’t really do that much more because of limited time and knowledge. Help get this article up to standard! Max Naylor 19:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

21 votes, Nominated April 25, 2007; needs at least 24 votes by June 6, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. — Jack · talk · 06:08, Wednesday, 25 April 2007
2. Astrowob 14:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Felixboy 15:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Darrenhusted 22:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. M&NCenarius 00:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. bibliomaniac15 01:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. RazorICE 02:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Megalodon99 _(Talk) 00:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. SpLoT // 05:16, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. Hojimachong^talk 05:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Twerbrou 09:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. M&NCenarius 23:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
13. BigrTex 14:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. Flubeca 19:10, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
15. Punkmorten 13:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
16. Kyoko 20:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
17. Hydrogen Iodide 07:19, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
18. Sportsjam3 17:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
19. Oneworld25 05:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
20. Dictouray 17:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
21. Ehjort 10:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Vital topic for any encyclopaedia, but is in poor shape. Pending a split, and has several lists of things that need doing, if anyone is interested? — Jack · talk · 06:08, Wednesday, 25 April 2007
• Especially with all of the discussion of it in Global Warming contexts recently. ~ BigrTex 14:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Way too long "see also" list, should and could be incorporated into prose. Punkmorten 13:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

16 votes, Nominated May 3, 2007; needs at least 20 votes by June 7, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Shrub of power 19:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. bibliomaniac15 00:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. YankeeDoodle14 04:13, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
4. Clay 06:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. kc12286 02:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)kc12286[reply]
6. Scalene^{•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography•Є•} 08:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. GDonato (talk) 10:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. yoyo
9. Wl219 12:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. S.dedalus 23:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Mrmoocow 23:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. Fbv65e
13. Sportsjam3 17:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
14. del / ☑t / ☛c || 22:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
15. Oneworld25 05:18, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
16. 02:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)Alston

Comments

• This is a very important book in terms of literature and social and historical context, but it needs some serious work doing - it contains several lists and very few citations. Would like to do some work, but am very pushed for time at present. Shrub of power 19:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

12 votes, Nominated May 7, 2007; needs at least 16 votes by June 4, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Adam78 10:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Wl219 13:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Astrowob 14:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Dami 19:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. – Alensha ^talk 19:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Mrmoocow 23:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. as extremely interesting. Punkmorten 13:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. - Flubeca t 21:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. gren グレン 11:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
11. Dalf | Talk 04:59, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
12. Bifgis 20:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• It could be a really useful article to review the major geopolitical changes of the 20th-21st centuries. There are blanks in the knowledge of all of us (for example, it was a surprise to me that a country named Eritrea exists – because it wasn't until 1993 that it was created and it was just missing from my atlas) and it would be interesting to see how the worldscape differed from the present one just a couple of decades ago and how it changed over time to reach its today's state. There are useful articles available as resources in its "See also" section. Adam78 10:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Seems interesting. Wl219 13:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Very good article idea. Astrowob 14:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• This is really cool. I'd definitely love to help. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 01:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I remember, say two years ago, seeing some incredibly successful article collaborations which I rarely see today. I think it was because there was lots of information available both online or already on Wikipedia. Although this isn't the greatest topic, I think it's a great one for collaboration because it doesn't require specialty sources. gren グレン 11:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

10 votes, Nominated May 8, 2007; needs at least 12 votes by May 29, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Gutworth 02:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Jeltz talk 22:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. bibliomaniac15 22:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Guy Fuchsia 14:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. User:Madris Madris 03:08, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Mrmoocow 23:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. - Flubeca t 19:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 22:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. ${\displaystyle \sim }$ Lenoxus " * " 15:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• This article is currently reffered to by Mediawiki:Loginend and right now has 3 tags on top. This article needs help! Gutworth 02:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I myself found the article through Loginend and realized that it is getting major exposure of a sort we don't always think about (rather than being a really popular topic in its own right). ${\displaystyle \sim }$ Lenoxus " * " 15:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

10 votes, Nominated May 8, 2007; needs at least 12 votes by May 29, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Wl219 06:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Mike Serfas 22:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. CJ 17:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. bibliomaniac15 00:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Caponer 16:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. Sportsjam3 17:02, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Flubeca t 16:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Oneworld25 05:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. Dalf | Talk 05:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• This article was recently demoted from featured article status due to a lack of citations. I think that can be pretty easily fixed given the amount of legal scholarship that's been written about it in the last 150 years. Wl219 06:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

5 votes, Nominated May 12, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by May 26, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Kzrulzuall ^{Talk• Contribs} 01:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 22:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Sportsjam3 15:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 22:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. Punkmorten 13:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• An extremely popular sport followed by millions... And not even a GA? --Kzrulzuall ^{Talk• Contribs} 01:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

10 votes, Nominated May 14, 2007; needs at least 12 votes by June 4, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Universe=atom^{•Talk•Contributions•} 17:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. --Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 22:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. --~KnowledgeHegemony~ 08:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. --Dwaipayan (talk) 13:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
5. --Shahab 13:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6. Felixboy 15:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
7. CG 13:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
8. Flubeca t 16:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
9. Oneworld25 05:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
10. gren グレン 11:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• A great article for joint improvement. Besides, it is about the history of ONE OF THE FOUR OLDEST CIVILIZATIONS IN THE WORLD. It has the content, but it needs structure, organization, references, and some cleanup. The history of each country should be among the top-ranking articles on Wikipedia. Please combine your efforts and help make it an FA. Thank you. Universe=atom 17:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• By the way, just a week or two ago, it was also the Indian Collaboration of the Week article. Universe=atom 18:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

4 votes, Nominated May 18, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by June 1, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. ***Clamster 20:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Jeltz talk 21:02, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. - Flubeca t 21:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 00:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• For such a common item, the page is fairly short and very disorganized. ***Clamster 20:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I was thinking the same thing - Flubeca t 21:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• So was I. Lεmσηflαsh^(t)/_(c) 00:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3 votes, Nominated May 19, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 26, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Punkmorten 18:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. •Felix• ^T 18:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Dictouray 21:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• Horrid article, capital city and thus rated as top-importance. Punkmorten 18:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen a capital city article in condition this bad! •Felix• ^T 18:53, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated May 21, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 28, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. BlueLotas 23:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• [1] BlueLotas 23:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's good to fix mistakes where they have been criticized... but, this seems a little too narrow a topic to get many people interested... and it severely limits users by making them go to history journals and books which most people won't have easy access to. gren グレン 11:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 votes, Nominated May 22, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 29, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Telcourbanio 13:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Dalf | Talk 05:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• It is a well known notable drink, and basically the article has seemed to have been left to rot with hardly any refs, and needing heavy cleanup and a number of other improvements. It is having a peer review, (which is being blatantly ignored), and generally a task force of users is needed to get it to GA. Telcourbanio Care for a talk? 13:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3 votes, Nominated May 23, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by May 30, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. John Carter 15:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. Emanuil Tolev 16:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Fire Star 火星 20:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Whatever your opinion about it, this subject, about a group which has recently had as many as 70 to 100 million practioners, and subsequently been banned by the Chinese government, is clearly and important subject and one whose article merits improvement. John Carter 15:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the articles need improvement, and big improvement, but they are also very difficult and perhaps require some dedication. Aside from this, the "to-do" list that was posted there is about a year old and not really applicable. A new "to-do" list would have to somehow be drawn up, taking into condition the state of the articles. Might be a good idea to check out the recent Arbcom case where two long time editors of these articles were just banned, for a bit of background. These pages have proven quite delicate and involved. It would be great to get capable and enthusiastic people to work on them, but I think some degree of preparation and consideration would be advisable. In particular, a new "to-do" list would have to be made up. Of course, these are just my own thoughts. --Asdfg12345 17:35, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to see improvement in all Falun Gong-related articles, but I also have to agree with Asdfg, that editors should have had an ample dedication to the subject for at least some time. We should not, however, say who can and who cannot edit, so I vote for it. faluninfo.net and falundafa.org are a very good starting point for editors who want to get themselves acquainted with the subject and start contributing :)! Emanuil Tolev 16:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is getting better, but the attention of outside editors would be much appreciated. From the standpoint of the actual article in distinction to the subject, I'd say that anyone familiar with Wikipedia policies about sourcing and formatting could have a valuable contribution to make. --Fire Star 火星 20:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

4 votes, Nominated May 23, 2007; needs at least 8 votes by June 6, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. jwillbur^talk 00:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
2. •Felix• ^T 14:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
3. Dalf | Talk 05:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4. Bifgis 20:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments: Looks pretty bad, room for improvement, expansion, and such, doesn't look that long or detailed. Alphablast 21:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• You do realise we collaborated on this three weeks ago? CloudNine 15:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated May 25, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by June 1, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. Billy227, Review my account!! ^{talk contribs sndbx usbx} 01:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• A pretty good article currently. Needs expansions and some more citations. A picture gallery would probably be good too. Overall, needs some improvement. -Billy227, Review my account!! ^{talk contribs sndbx usbx} 01:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated May 25, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by June 1, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. SunStar Net ^talk 18:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• This is an article that is in decent shape so far, and is of personal interest to me for two reasons:
  

1. I studied this in my GCSE geography.
2. It was also the subject of ITV's Police, Camera, Action! in the 1996 episode The Man Who Shot OJ Programme 2, about the Los Angeles News Service.
Any help would be appreciated if you can: I would like this to be the Featured Article one day. If you want to help me or have any questions, leave a note on my talk page SunStar Net ^talk 18:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1 vote, Nominated May 25, 2007; needs at least 4 votes by June 1, 2007 Overdue

Support

1. •Felix• ^T 19:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• A big topic affecting millions of people needs a little help and improvement. •Felix• ^T 19:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]