Talk:Archive:New Draft of the Week/Archive 1

Archive:New Draft of the Week

Current talk page

Archive 1

Day of the week

What day of the week should the New Article be selected? We could keep it Tuesday, to synch up with the Article of the Week. It might be nice to have it on a different day, though, so we see Main Page updates twice a week instead of just once. I'm going to go ahead and change it to Thursday for right now, to keep it as a weekday thing and to also let us start off the program as soon as possible. If anyone has any objections or alternate suggestions please say so.--Carl Jantzen 23:15, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

Front page or no?

Should the New Article of the Week appear on the front page? It would make the page somewhat less simplistic, as well as possibly highlight an incomplete article. However the added attention might be useful in improving the article. Should it be on the front page, or perhaps highlighted on Project Home or somewhere else in the CZ namespace? --Carl Jantzen 09:44, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

My instinct is that an announce could appear, the precise form to be yet determined. The "added attention" is difficult to overestimate. Besides, this would be a "reward" for the authors. I'm already planning to get there ;-) Aleksander Stos 10:46, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

Take a look at Main Page/Test to see how the front page would look with a New Article of the Week. Not bad, if I do say so myself. Unless anyone objects I will update the Main Page at 1900 UTC tomorrow to reflect whichever article wins the honors. --Carl Jantzen 23:26, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

Rules

Carl, I've noticed you've already nominated two articles which violates the stated rules. :) My other comment is, what qualifies an article as a "New" article? Terrier seems obvious because it was made today, but Edward I has been around since 7/20. Is there a time frame we look at for this, say 2 weeks? Also, as far as article completion, can stubs be nominated? My personal opinion is this would be a good venue to show off articles that are ranked 2, developing, in hopes of attracting other authors attention and they can jump in on the collaboration process. --Todd Coles 09:59, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

Haha, you're absolutely right Todd. I can't believe I didn't notice this. I guess I was just too excited to get this project moving. I've un-nominated Terrier for now to bring myself back in compliance. Whoops! -- Carl Jantzen 10:01, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

We're definitely going to need to come up with some guidelines for what articles do and don't qualify as "new". I was thinking articles newer than 1 month, and ranked a 1 or 2 would be eligible. I also think the 1 month timeframe should be from when the article stopped being a stub, not necessarily from the date the software says it was created. I think allowing articles ranked 1 is important because it would let articles that are decently developed, but only by one author, to gain exposure to other authors and editors. -- Carl Jantzen 10:06, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

I think we shouldn't restrict new article of the week to just the last week - To be honest it would be difficult to find new articles created in just the last week that would meet criteria. Though then again it depends on the direction we decide to take - should it be developed articles or developing articles on the new article of the week? Also, Is it ethical to vote for my own article?Denis Cavanagh 10:10, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

I think that at least for now voting on your own article is ok. Since you can nominate yourself you should be able to vote for yourself. Perhaps when the program gets off the ground we'll change it. On the other hand it might not be easy to find good new articles, so maybe we want to keep the rule that lets you nominate/vote for your own articles even then. -- Carl Jantzen 10:13, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

I would agree that saying articles within the last month would be a good limit. You can easily check the list of new articles with the date they were created here - http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Special:Newpages . Since most articles on CZ are not created at the stub level, this should be able to give people a pretty good idea of what articles can qualify as "new".--Todd Coles 10:17, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

Monthly Write-a-thon as article source

One place to look for articles to nominate might be the list of new articles created during the CZ:Monthly Write-a-Thon. --Carl Jantzen 10:16, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

Interested in New Article of the Week

Please sign below if you are interested in, at the very least, selecting a Creation of the Week.New Article of the Week

1. Aleksander Stos
2. Larry Sanger (if we can call it "New Article of the Week"--excellent idea)
3.  —Stephen Ewen (Talk)
4. John Stephenson
5. Matthew Cornell Woods, Jr.
6. Eric M Gearhart
7. Carl Jantzen - I hope I'm not being too bold by going ahead and starting to jot down some proposed rules about this program. I don't know if I need to get approval or anything to do this...if so someone please let me know. Archive:New Draft of the Week
8. Todd Coles
9. Denis Cavanagh
10. Robert King

Rename?

How about Archive:New Draft of the Week? This will make it easier to distinguish from CZ:Article of the Week and will also make it clear that we do not think our new articles are, necessarily, completed articles. --Larry Sanger 08:05, 10 August 2007 (CDT)

I don't know - for a curious traveller, 'new draft of the week' looks kinda tacky. Or something. Denis Cavanagh 08:09, 10 August 2007 (CDT)

Perhaps something like Recent Creation of the Week? --Todd Coles 12:09, 10 August 2007 (CDT)

"Recent Creation of the Week" sounds like we have divine aspirations. In lieu of anything better, I'm going to change it to "New Draft of the Week," which (pace Denis) I think sounds perfectly fine. --Larry Sanger 12:20, 22 August 2007 (CDT)

I don't really mind whats it called :-) Denis Cavanagh 06:06, 24 August 2007 (CDT)

Moved from the page

I won't be able to update the front page this week, so can someone else take care of it? Thank you. -- Carl Jantzen 09:44, 13 August 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, I'll do it at some stage Denis Cavanagh 10:09, 13 August 2007 (CDT)

I wrote that on the front page based on this little piece of the policy, inherited from the Article of the Week: "If you are volunteering to change the article of the week on the front page, then say so above the "article nominees" table ("I'm doing the honors this time" -- Jane Doe) so that no one else does it." Do you guys think we should have this on the front page or here on Talk? --Carl Jantzen 11:45, 15 August 2007 (CDT)

"Doing the honors" lasts for a couple of minutes and should be better announced on the front page, not the talk -- just to prevent others from doing the same work. Aleksander Stos 08:21, 17 August 2007 (CDT) PS. Front page means Archive:New Draft of the Week, not the Main Page as few sections above.

Tied votes

It was agreed on the Article of the Week Talk page that the rules under 'In the event of a tie' be used, so I have copied them here, adding that winning articles may be so named after their last eligible date. I think this is fair because as a last resort, the winner is identified by alphabetical precedence. John Stephenson 10:38, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

"Alphabetical order: The article appearing first by English alphabetical order shall be named New Draft of the Week.". Prey your article doesn't start with Z. I feel that in the event of a tie, the article with the most number of verified references should win. This would encourage editors to use more references in articles. Meg Ireland 18:35, 10 March 2008 (CDT)

Sorry

I just realized that I broke the rules by nominating two different articles on this page! Sorry! --05:20, 25 August 2007 (CDT)

Don't worry about it, Larry. The same day I created the New Article of the Week, right after reading all the rules and posting them I nominated two different articles without realizing it. -- Carl Jantzen 11:18, 25 August 2007 (CDT)

Articles expiring

Just something to keep an eye on, other than Scarborough Castle which appears will win this week, the other nominated articles will not qualify for the following week (all will be over a month old). --Todd Coles 08:22, 5 September 2007 (CDT)

New Article

I don't want to do it myself (since an article I wrote seems to be winning!) but maybe someone should move the new draft of the week to the front page? It hasn't been moved since Dec. 6th. Denis Cavanagh 14:13, 30 December 2007 (CST)

Good show!

I confess to not being really good at following the draft/article of the week, but I'm here now and just want to say that I'm really enjoying the offerings. Diverse and engaging--can I vote for them all? Well done, people! Aleta Curry 16:08, 30 December 2007 (CST)

I've extended the deadlines for drafts whose eligibility would expire soon, on the grounds that we had no updating. --Martin Baldwin-Edwards 16:18, 30 December 2007 (CST)

Nominate something

Come on folks... Denis Cavanagh 09:04, 8 April 2008 (CDT)

Changing a rule

I suggest to change the current rule

No Citizen may have nominated more than one article listed under "current nominees" at a time. 

into

No Citizen may have nominated more than three articles listed under "current nominees" at a time. 

This is just to comply with the habits that have developed recently, and to encourage nominations. -- Daniel Mietchen 04:55, 8 August 2008 (CDT)

Second the suggestion. Anthony.Sebastian 16:57, 8 August 2008 (CDT)

Lack of nominees

We need more nominees folks. If no else nominates, I will add some additional ones tomorrow. David E. Volk 18:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)