| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
| I am copy-editing [[Mithila (Nepal)]] (2936) as tagged, but after I am finished I would request that a British English speaker review it for any inadvertent Americanisms. --[[User:Dthomsen8|DThomsen8]] ([[User talk:Dthomsen8|talk]]) 15:53, 8 May 2012 (UTC) | I am copy-editing [[Mithila (Nepal)]] (2936) as tagged, but after I am finished I would request that a British English speaker review it for any inadvertent Americanisms. --[[User:Dthomsen8|DThomsen8]] ([[User talk:Dthomsen8|talk]]) 15:53, 8 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
| + | :Will do, provided it survives its AfD (which looks probable). Please let me know when it's ready. --[[User:Stfg|Stfg]] ([[User talk:Stfg|talk]]) 16:42, 8 May 2012 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 16:42, 8 May 2012
|
Contents |
[edit] Copyediting with few or no changes
What should be done with articles marked for copyediting but with few or no changes needed? I encountered some in the March 2012 drive, and I am finding more now as part of my preparation for the May 2012 drive. --DThomsen8 (talk) 02:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- In the past, I've just made a judgment call. If there is really practically nothing to be changed, just remove the tag and make the handful of changes, if any, required and don't give yourself credit for anything. I don't think we'd be able to come up with a hard and fast rule for the number of changes per number of words necessary to "count" enough for credit. Unless someone has a more specific idea? —Torchiest talkedits 00:47, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Having thought about it, I am thinking of giving myself credit for an article, and no words, which puts me on the article count leader list, but not getting words towards a barnstar. That would be minimalist credit but a specific idea. --DThomsen8 (talk) 00:57, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- I think that's a good approach. No words, but after all, you've taken the trouble to check through the article to know that nothing needs doing. Torchiest is right. The counts are at best approximations to the amount of effort involved. Thank you both. --Stfg (talk) 08:56, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Agreed. That sounds like a great compromise. —Torchiest talkedits 13:34, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Having thought about it, I am thinking of giving myself credit for an article, and no words, which puts me on the article count leader list, but not getting words towards a barnstar. That would be minimalist credit but a specific idea. --DThomsen8 (talk) 00:57, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Timothy Francis Donovan Aaron with 0 words credit, as an agreed procedure above. --DThomsen8 (talk) 02:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Signing up
My username is ChromaNebula (talk) , which begins with C. How do I add myself to the list? ChromaNebula (talk) 00:37, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Just copy the text in the blue box, and paste it in the appropriate place alphabetically. --DThomsen8 (talk) 00:59, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
[edit] A "silly reason" prize
I will give a barnstar to the editor who, while copy editing an article for the drive, finds and records here the most amusing instance of a word like, because, since, as or suchlike, where the alleged reason is absurd. Please append them to the numbered list below and sign each one. Have fun! --Stfg (talk) 14:38, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
- "It had eaten recently because deer had been found in its stomach." from Onza. --Stfg (talk) 14:38, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Copyediting question of the fortnight
So I'm back, and rather than kick up a hornet's nest at the MOS, I thought I'd ask a general style question here (as I did last drive). This time it's two unrelated clauses, joined by "and". For example:
- After graduating from college, Livitup spent the summer traveling throughout France, and in 2010 he returned to the United States and started applying for jobs.
What gets me about constructions like this is that the two aren't really connected things. He travelled. He returned and applied for jobs. Two independent events, two independent sentences. I'll recast these things, but that usually means tearing up a whole paragraph, in order to avoid choppy sentences. Thoughts? Livit⇑Eh?/What? 18:17, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Remove copyedit tag or no?
Hello! I'm brand new to this guild, and fairly new to Wikipedia style, though I've been editing for ten years or so on an occasional basis. My question is about the suggestion that the copyedit tag be removed only if someone has confidence in their own abilities. I'm a professional freelance copyeditor, and quite knowledgeable when it comes to grammar, how styles vary, different forms of English, etc. On the other hand, my knowledge of Wiki style (and especially layout) is so-so. I'm wondering, since this drive requires that we remove the tag to get credit, what I should do. Do I link every article here and ask for proofreading before counting towards my total? I imagine this would create a lot of work for others! Avory (talk) 16:52, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for joining us! You can remove a tag whenever you're comfortable doing so, and it doesn't require approval from anyone else, but if you want someone to look at one for the sake of wiki layout issues, don't hesitate to ask. Just pop a request here and someone will take a look. Rgds, --Stfg (talk) 19:14, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
[edit] FAC articles
Did we agree on a policy for editing FAC articles, or articles attempting to reach FAC article status? I seem to recall a suggestion that only approved and experienced copy-editors would be welcome to edit such articles. Can we get some comment from the mandarins please? --Greenmaven (talk) 08:01, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
- We hope for a very high standard of writing at that level, and for familiarity with the MoS (not knowing it off by heart, but at least knowing what it covers and where to look when you can't remember). There has never been a system for approving people to do this, and of course nobody has a mandate to tell anyone what they may or may not edit. At present we depend on people to take a realistic view of their own abilities. I've been wondering for a while if it would be feasible to offer people some sort of advice on the level at which they could work best. If we do anything like that, we need to remember that professional copy editors and academics occasionally show up here and we shouldn't discourage them from jumping right in. It would be very interesting to learn people's opinions about this. --Stfg (talk) 08:52, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Dianna's million
Yesterday Dianna completed her 1567th article copy edited on a GOCE drive, and in doing so brought her total word count over all GOCE drives to 1,002,169. For this exceptional achievement, her fellow coordinators, Dank and Stfg, have added her name to the GOCE Hall of Fame. Congratulations, Dianna, and thanks for all your copy editing and your leadership, example, and frequent assistance to all of us. --Stfg (talk) 21:07, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you! What a nice surprise and a big honour. On to my second million ... :) --Dianna (talk) 23:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I am copy-editing Mithila (Nepal) (2936) as tagged, but after I am finished I would request that a British English speaker review it for any inadvertent Americanisms. --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:53, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Hengrock 09 May, 2012
-
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Backlog_elimination_drives/May_2012&diff=491412111&oldid=491411719
--
Manage subscription | Powered by rssforward.com
