Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

2012 · 2013 · 2014 · 2015 · 2016 · 2017 · 2018 · 2019 · 2020 · 2021 · 2022 · 2023 · 2024

Suggest a "tips" section, where we point out common issues and how to fix them, such as how to format ISBNs and why 13 is preferred over 10.PumpkinSky talk 11:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Bryllupsdag på Troldhaugen needs an English speaker, especially for the translation of the first title, in German "Die Gratulanten kommen", the guest who want to congratulate. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:43, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

• User:Dweller/Featured Articles that haven't been on Main Page

Some of you may have seen comments at FAC/TFAR etc talk pages about Dweller's survey of the older FAs to see which are suitable for the main page without any or much difficulty and which need FAR sooner rather than later. He asked whether there was interest in setting up a new Wikiproject to tackle the work, but I wonder if it would fit neatly within the scope of WP:QAI - and it might help attract more people here too to help with QAI's other work. Thoughts? Bencherlite^Talk 11:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

It sounds like a reasonable view. I am going to be out of the country for a while starting tonight so I probably won't be able to do much. But checking old FAs sounds worthwhile and it has nothing to do with FA leadership, which will hopefully stifle the comments I saw that this is some sort of a cabal meeting place. That being said, Bencherlite, it would be helpful in drumming up enthusiasm, if you would stop removing Br'er Rabbit's name from the project page. I have changed "members" to "contributors" and he certainly did that, so this should resolve that matter.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:12, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I didn't realise that keeping the name of someone who could no longer participate in a list of participants would be so controversial. Consider it resolved. To deal with your other point, I hadn't seen comments about this being a cabal meeting place, although I haven't seen many comments at all about WP:QAI elsewhere, to tell the truth... WP's best-kept secret squad of superheroes?! Bencherlite^Talk 12:34, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps it was on IRC ... that being said, including Br'er's name is a small conceit indeed compared to saying that an inactive editor who left under the threat of ArbCom sanctions is the absolute ruler of a certain part of the project.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:03, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Erm. Is there a view on the main point raised here? --Dweller (talk) 12:18, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

The idea is good, but I don't see a person to deal with it right now, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:18, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I will have very limited internet access for a month starting early next week, so I can't commit time. But it is a good idea.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:24, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Article reviews and talk pages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps I don't understand the problem yet. My example: this is now linked from the talk, and will be under Article milestones when done, - all this (+ its even longer talk) would be long on the article talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:15, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Wonder if there is some way we can generate a "go to" list of people with specific expertise in things like {{sfn}} markup, navbox design, improving existing and noncontroversial things that are used behind the scenes by wikipedia or google to help with searches, how to format for FAC runs, people willing to do specific reviews for the petty things like endashes and emdashes, etc. Call it a talent bank or something. Thoughts? Montanabw^(talk) 21:54, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Good idea! Anybody who wants to know about microformats should ask RexxS, for example, see the explanation at Talk:Mont Juic (suite)#Removed Infobox that even I might understand, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:26, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Dyanega is an insect expert. M.E. Hahn is a mushroom expert. PumpkinSky talk 22:43, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello.

I've been directed here by Wikipedia editor, Mark Arsten, who was unable to answer the citation formatting problem I'm encountering with my developing article. Yesterday, I added in all the required secondary sources throughout the body of the article text, when I went to 'save' the work all of the citations displayed 'empty citation.' I've reviewed the footnote, citation information on Wikipedia, (and a lot of other material that Mark has directed me to) but, I remain stumped. Obviously, I'm doing something incorrectly and am hoping that someone on this site will take pity on me (and my woeful lack of technical expertise!) and help me. Right now, I'm pretty frustrated and definitely in need of a way out of the weeds.

Here are three examples of how I formatted various citations in my article. Have a done something wrong here?  !

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help)

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help)

{{citation}}: Empty citation (help)

Many, Many Thanks,

Larry Kaptein

Wow. Sorry I didn't notice this before. I know how to fix this. Which article are you talking about? Do you still need help? PumpkinSky talk 22:46, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

I would like to invite this group to the discussion Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Neutral Editors.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 02:41, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.orghttps://wikifreehand.com/en/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 18:12, 15 March 2014 (UTC).

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 16:48, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Could this unusual placing and wording be discussed? I find it odd: it obscures other text, and it is not at all clear what it refers to. In a word, it is not transparent to the uninitiated user. If this page is intended to communicate to people outside the "cabal" (is it), surely there would be some clearer way of indicating (a) who the "cabal" is (nowhere else mentioned on the page) and (b) what the approval means. Simon Grant (talk) 17:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for asking, but I feel a bit like explaining a joke. Background: the image and cabal wisdom. First message: we are odd. You received that ;) - Second: we don't take ourselves too serious. Did you get that? Third: we are able to do unusual things and communicate that. You got it. The terms "cabal" and "QAI shenigans" were used for us by respected users, that's approval enough. - Unfortunately fourth: I copied (look here for the model) but am not able to position it better, help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

OK I give in :) Just that, perhaps, in jokes shouldn't be at the expense of outsiders. In this case, their ability to read the material... We had a small conference session on the topic of Wikipedia this week, and it is very clear that there are so many outsiders out there, of which I am obviously one. Humour doesn't have to oppose transparency, but if it does, I'd favour transparency every time, to be kind. I appreciate it when jokes are self-documenting... Bach's music stands by itself, even if you don't understand the immensely subtle structure. It wouldn't work to explain away a discordant note as a joke, but we don't need to. Simon Grant (talk) 05:04, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Did you find the model? I was able to change some parameters, but I don't know how to make it appear in the empty space next to it's creator in all browsers. If you can help with that you are welcome. It's not a joke, rather an epitaph. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:29, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

No sorry I didn't find the model, as that page is enormous. Any tips how to find it in the page? Simon Grant (talk) 03:32, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Look for "thanks for fixing my screwups", - that is the refrain of the page of enormous contributions to Wikipedia, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:32, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

If there was no in-house humor around here, we'd all give up. This is a volunteer activity, Asimong, and no one is paying us to put up with all the shit which which we are given, so we have to do what we can to keep inspired. Montanabw^(talk) 18:57, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Continuation of discussion from my user talk page as started by Gerda Arendt (talk · contribs) and Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs).

What were you two going to suggest?

— Cirt (talk) 13:37, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I asked if I was meant. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:52, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Recently a member of our weekly improvement drive stumbled upon this project page. I just wanted to say hello and see if there was any thing that our two groups could collaborate together on, or if we could provide support to one another in some manner. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 16:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello back! Historically, we came from the TFA area, because we had to improvise when an important person there left. Accessibility became another topic. As said on the project page, we are rather unorganized, and sadly missing important people. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Right now I'm reading up on esophageal cancer and intend reviewing Esophageal cancer soon and proposing/making changes, to prepare it for review by an expert nominated by CRUK. I'm going to copy and collate the supporting text from every source, and am going to ask someone independent to check every assertion against the supporting RS text before we submit it for expert review.

Presently, at Wikiproject Medicine, we're not using "A Class". I'm thinking of adopting that term for articles whose assertions have all been independently checked against the sources. Thoughts? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 13:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I am short on time and not a medical expert, but let's see, - I am not alone, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:59, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I'd just ignore A-class and use WP:GA and WP:Peer review. — Cirt (talk) 14:15, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Using existing processes makes sense. But "GA" doesn't mean someone has independently checked that all the content reflects what the cited sources say. I'm proposing articles whose veracity has been independently checked against the sources be marked as such.

I'm very focussed on making Wikipedia a WP:RS, at least as far as our medical content is concerned. Although this independent veracity-check won't make an article a WP:RS on its own, it will take it closer - and I think medical articles that have been through it ought to have some kind of recognition, and I thought calling them "A" class was as good a designation as any.

What do you think of the idea of making a Wikipedia article a reliable source? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 14:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

It's an idea! My second article ever - I had planned only one but that came with the wish to link to another which didn't exist yet ... - was a translation from German. I thought that was all sourcing needed ;) - I think even if you had an sc-article (sources checked), that could change with any new edit. As long as we have the idea of free editing, we can't guarantee reliability. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I think WP:FA is a better standard than A-class. — Cirt (talk) 16:36, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

FA is better than A-class, and GA "should" indicate A-class quality, though we know some reviewers don't necessarily engage in rigorous fact- checking. I am wondering if you folks would want to do something akin to what the MilHist WP does, with an independent project A-class review, an example of this was done on one of "my" older GAs after it passed its GAN, Horses in Warfare, see the project boxes at Talk:Horses_in_warfare. Perhaps a similar sort of "this project 'blesses' this article as accurate" standard could be created - one criterion would be meticulous fact-checking and review of sources. Montanabw^(talk) 16:51, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

That is an excellent idea, and the WP:MILHIST process is a good model. — Cirt (talk) 17:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Someone's mentioned MilHist in this context before. I'd better go check it out. Thanks for the feedback.

Gerda, regarding the ephemeral nature of fack-checking, what we're planning on doing is putting a badge at the top of articles that have been through topic-expert review (like the ones being reviewed by CRUK) linking the reader to the version that has passed expert review. The idea is that version (not the current version) - if the review process is truly expert and independent - will be a WP:RS. I.e., it should be reliable enough to cite in other Wikipedia articles. (I wouldn't expect anyone to do that, when they could as easily cite the article's sources - I'm just pointing out the degree of reliability we're aiming for with the expert-review process.) --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 00:26, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

I understand that quoting a certain "certified" checked version as reliable would be an idea. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:28, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

• User:Cirt/Gutting

I've created an essay on Gutting an article during deletion discussion.

You may find it interesting reading at: User:Cirt/Gutting.

Cheers,

— Cirt (talk) 18:22, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Good to know, watching for now, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Peru national football team, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:19, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Done, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:42, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox for an initiative regarding this recommended remedy. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:56, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Compromise now found without it, but thank you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:43, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm terribly sorry if it is wrong to put my application here (but that's what is said in the page, yet there is none so) but could I join this project? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neutral Isotope (talk • contribs) 13:36, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

If you are sure you want to join you simply go to the project page and enter your name, preceded by # and signed by four tildes (which you missed doing above, I sent some explanations to your talk), - no prerequisites except assuming good faith. This talk page is for requests. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:46, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest.--Lucas559 (talk) 22:51, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:16, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt • Haben wir ein Userboxen? JackTheVicar (talk) 16:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

No, not yet, people may be ashamed to out themselves as members of the cabal of the outcasts, - go ahead, design one. We have boxes for Precious, for example, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:30, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Herewith: JackTheVicar (talk) 22:55, 26 August 2015 (UTC) {{User QAI outcast}}

That's good, only the image is great - love the subtle irony - but not recognizable that size, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

• hard to find anything that scales well to 50px.JackTheVicar (talk) 13:24, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

yes, - anything abstact? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:39, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

abstract in which way? I found a great picture of sugar cane cutters in the Caribbean. Tough work. I just thought a stone mason would be more apropos. JackTheVicar (talk) 14:01, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Fine, I took it ;) - can you make a variable, to say he or she? (Or make two?) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:33, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

a female stonecutter? Let me see if I can find one. I know there's a female contractor building a house on commons. JackTheVicar (talk) 13:04, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

no, just a wording for female users, - about half of us ;) - did you see that a new member joined just because of the box? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

he joined for the userbox, but he'll stay for the beer (Cask ale, GregJackP, I'm good for a few rounds). I wrote the userbox to be gender-neutral, there's nothing that makes it exclusively male except the image. Even green is somewhat neutral. What would you suggest? JackTheVicar (talk) 13:39, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Never mind, I even took it myself as is. I don't like this "themselves", - it reminds me of the sound of my arbcom admonishment "advised to better conduct themselves" while even the least observant arb may have noticed that I am a woman. Who observed less, the one who possibly thought - 2 years ago today - that an infobox was added in an edit where it was only uncollapsed, or the colleagues who didn't question that? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:08, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Have you helped take an article from Articles for deletion to Featured Article or Good Article quality ?

show your Quality improvement pride with

• {{User AFD to FA|n}}

(where n is the number of articles you've helped rescue and take to Featured Article quality)

This user has successfully taken n articles from deletion discussion at Articles for Deletion — to Featured Article quality.

 – There's an automatically-generated list of members using this banner here.

• {{User AFD to GA|n}}

(where n is the number of articles you've helped rescue and take to Good Article quality)

This user has successfully taken n articles from deletion discussion at Articles for Deletion — to Good Article quality.

 – There's an automatically-generated list of members using this banner here.

Check out these two new userboxes I've added, above. Haven't added them to this particular project, but added them at page for WP:Article Rescue Squadron. Perhaps editors here may find them useful, as well. — Cirt (talk) 23:22, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

I've created the WP:Deletion to Quality Award.

This recognizes editors who've taken a page previously considered for deletion — to Featured Article or Good Article quality.

The award is inspired by the Wikipedia:Million Award, the Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron, and the Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement.

Please see Wikipedia:Deletion to Quality Award.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 00:25, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I've created an essay page on usage of the term "Navel-gazing" in deletion debates on Wikipedia.

Essay at: WP:Navel-gazing.

Feedback would be appreciated on the talk page, at Wikipedia talk:Navel-gazing.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 20:22, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, interesting, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:39, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, it has been suggested to me by editor Coretheapple in the Discussion area of a current GA reassessment that the review be brought to the attention of a wider audience. The reassessment raises the questions of sourcing; neutrality; extraordinary claims; and level of detail present in the article. The article in question is Hyacinth Graf Strachwitz and this reassessment falls within the scope of the project.

I hope editors of this project would be interested in reviewing the article to see if it still meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria and whether it should be retained or delisted as a Good article. I would appreciate any feedback you could share. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:25, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I'm sharing these two discussions with this project as they both deal with article quality:

• Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)#Notability in Knight's Cross Holder Articles

• Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Otto Kittel/1

Additional eyes on these areas would be welcome! K.e.coffman (talk) 10:26, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Without wishing to get too involved at this point, I came across an MfD of a page in this WikiProject's space and was surprised not to see a notification here: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Infobox. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:04, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

There's an invitation on the talk of Columbia River to polish the article - an older FA - for a TFA appearance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:07, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Good news: the article will be TFA in July. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

It's today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:48, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

A peer review is open to bring Ein feste Burg ist unser Gott, BWV 80, to best possible quality for Reformation Day, Oct 31, 500 years in 2017. All other efforts are also welcome! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Rüdesheim am Rhein will be shown on the Main page with a featured article. Red links, few inline citations, - a call for improvement. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:04, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

The article was greatly improved, and four red links filled, - thanks especially to Bermicourt and GermanJoe! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:00, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Feel free to suggest work to be done. I want to focus on the psalms, beginning with Psalm 149, Sing a new song unto the Lord. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:03, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Jauchzet, dienet ...

rejoice, serve, serve with joy, reflect, come together to dance and give thanks
listen, 2017 · see also

A related work is TFA today, - encouragement to serve with joy. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

In this section, we can collect things that we want every psalm article to have, as a recipe. I take Psalm 103 as an example. General: It's "Psalm 103", but "a psalm". Sources should be given in Wikisource, rather than external links. References!

Lead

The lead should have

• the Septuagint/Vulgate number if different
• the incipit in English, to make it recognizable
• what type, per Psalms#Primary types?
• author and time if known
• a summary of use in liturgy and music

optional: summary of content, special features, commentary, similarity/relation to other psalms

Text and theme

It is nice to have at least some text, in Hebrew and English.

Liturgical use

Subdivided by denomination.

Musical settings

This section can get very long, then consider a list or table. If hymns are derived from the psalm they should come first, because often other music is derived from them.

External links

should contain

• Commonscat if not empty
• Source, always in English (and check for other languages), {{wikisource|Bible (King James)/Psalms#Psalm 103|Psalm 103}}:

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

Psalm 103

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:23, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

It's a problem that the numbering of the psalms is different Hebrew/Greek, and also the numbering of the verses is different Hebrew/English. Playing with it, example Psalm 84:

Ideas? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Psalm 84 was improved to GA and can serve as the best model so far. For text, it has Hebrew and its translations, and the KJV. -Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

User:Gerda Arendt, are Psalms really generally known in English by their first verse? I'm seeing this on a lot of Psalm articles, but I'm having trouble understanding where this comes from. I'd flag it as unsourced, but since you've clearly done quite a bit on the Psalms, I thought I'd hold off and see what you think. Alephb (talk) 05:24, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

How would you word that the number alone says nothing about a psalm? Many will know "The Lord is my Shepherd" but will not know any number. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

We could say "Psalm 23, in the KJV "The Lord is my Shephers", is ...", but for some psalms that would be quite long, and for others the first verse would begin "A Psalm of David" which again doesn't identify a specific one, see Sing a new song unto the Lord which could be 3. Any first line alone is not enough but the combination of number and some text should do. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

"in English" is meant to imply "in German as Der Herr ist mein Hirte", - that these songs are used in many many languages, - how to say that?

(copied from Talk:Psalm 138) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm. There's a number of questions there. I suppose in the case of Psalm 23, the "Lord is my Shepherd" language is a well-known way of referring to it. Or with Psalm 22, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me..." For those, the incipit functions kind of like a title. I guess where I wonder most is with a Psalm like 145: "I will extol thee, my God, O king; and I will bless thy name for ever and ever." I'm not sure how many English-speakers would refer to it by that "name". I suppose my concern is that this would be a little bit like saying, "Hamlet is a play by William Shakespeare, generally known in English by it's first line, 'Who's there?'" (Not a perfect analogy, I know.)

I don't want to make trouble, though -- it's entirely possible I'm missing something here. I was just curious. Also, this quality improvement area we're in is completely unfamiliar to me. Are there any special rules or practices for this area that I should know about? Alephb (talk) 09:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Understand. The Shakespeare comparison doesn't work, because Hamlet is a title, and primary topic is Shakekespeare's play. Psalm 22 is no title, and without saying more, some people will think of "The Lord is my Shepherd", and others of "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" - We need to make sure, and soon in the article, which one it is. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:31, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm totally with you on Psalms 22 and 23. My question is for the more obscure Psalms. In my experience (which of course is just me and doesn't count as a source or anything) these Psalms are generally referred to in speech as "Psalm Number X", and not by their first verse. I'm wondering if maybe for a Psalm like 138 we could open with something like: <<"Psalm 138 is the 138th psalm of the Book of Psalms, beginning with, "I will praise thee with my whole heart" (King James Version).>> I'd have just made the change myself to the Psalm in question if I hadn't seen a notice recently that seemed to imply there was some sort of review process needed first on Psalm articles. Alephb (talk) 06:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Miriam Makeba

4 March 1932 – 9 November 2008

The project is happy about Miriam Makeba for TFA on her birthday today, "a musician and activist who had a lasting impact on music and popular culture in South Africa and abroad". Nominate your quality articles here for reviews and the TFAR process, WE CAN! ---Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:39, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Happy 2019 – a Time for thanks and praise

Feel free to suggest work to be done. Begun in 2018, I want to focus on the psalms, next Psalm 96, Sing a new song unto the Lord, and on Bach cantatas.

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Bachsaal at Schloss Köthen

Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht (Time, which day and year doth make), BWV 134a, is a secular cantata by Johann Sebastian Bach for a celebration of New Year's Day in 1719 at the court of Leopold, Prince of Anhalt-Köthen (hall in the palace pictured). The libretto by the author Christian Friedrich Hunold portrays a dialogue between two allegorical figures, Time (representing the past) and Divine Providence (the future). Bach set the words to eight movements consisting of alternating recitatives and arias, culminating in a choral finale. Most movements are duets for alto and tenor, supported by a Baroque instrumental ensemble of two oboes, strings and continuo. The character of the music is close to Baroque opera, including its French dances. In Leipzig in 1724, Bach used this secular work as the basis for a church cantata for the Third Day of Easter, omitting two movements and changing only the text. (1 January 2019)

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

In this section, we can collect things that we want every psalm article to have, as a recipe. I take Psalm 103 as an example. General: It's "Psalm 103", but "a psalm". Sources should be given in Wikisource, rather than external links. References!

Lead

The lead should have

• the Septuagint/Vulgate number if different
• the beginning in English, to make it recognizable
• what type, per Psalms#Primary types?
• author and time if known
• a summary of use in liturgy and music

optional: summary of content, special features, commentary, similarity/relation to other psalms

Text and theme

It is nice to have at least some text, in Hebrew and English.

as of 17 September watch out!

A website which has Hebrew text and a good translation has been found under copyright. See here. For the time being, I'd recommend to quote no text, and leave translations to external links, even if that is no service to the reader who so far could compare at a glance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:48, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Liturgical use

Subdivided by denomination.

Musical settings

This section can get very long, then consider a list or table. If hymns are derived from the psalm they should come first, because often other music is derived from them.

External links

should contain

• Commonscat if not empty
• Source, always in English (and check for other languages), {{wikisource|Bible (King James)/Psalms#Psalm 103|Psalm 103}}:

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

Psalm 103

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:23, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

It's a problem that the numbering of the psalms is different Hebrew/Greek, and also the numbering of the verses is different Hebrew/English. Playing with it, example Psalm 84:

Ideas? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:45, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Psalm 84 was improved to GA and can serve as the best model so far. For text, it has Hebrew and its translations, and the KJV. -Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

User:Gerda Arendt, are Psalms really generally known in English by their first verse? I'm seeing this on a lot of Psalm articles, but I'm having trouble understanding where this comes from. I'd flag it as unsourced, but since you've clearly done quite a bit on the Psalms, I thought I'd hold off and see what you think. Alephb (talk) 05:24, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

How would you word that the number alone says nothing about a psalm? Many will know "The Lord is my Shepherd" but will not know any number. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

We could say "Psalm 23, in the KJV "The Lord is my Shephers", is ...", but for some psalms that would be quite long, and for others the first verse would begin "A Psalm of David" which again doesn't identify a specific one, see Sing a new song unto the Lord which could be 3. Any first line alone is not enough but the combination of number and some text should do. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

"in English" is meant to imply "in German as Der Herr ist mein Hirte", - that these songs are used in many many languages, - how to say that?

(copied from Talk:Psalm 138) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Hmmm. There's a number of questions there. I suppose in the case of Psalm 23, the "Lord is my Shepherd" language is a well-known way of referring to it. Or with Psalm 22, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me..." For those, the incipit functions kind of like a title. I guess where I wonder most is with a Psalm like 145: "I will extol thee, my God, O king; and I will bless thy name for ever and ever." I'm not sure how many English-speakers would refer to it by that "name". I suppose my concern is that this would be a little bit like saying, "Hamlet is a play by William Shakespeare, generally known in English by it's first line, 'Who's there?'" (Not a perfect analogy, I know.)

I don't want to make trouble, though -- it's entirely possible I'm missing something here. I was just curious. Also, this quality improvement area we're in is completely unfamiliar to me. Are there any special rules or practices for this area that I should know about? Alephb (talk) 09:05, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Late reply: no rules, just do what you can. If you can supply English translations of the Hebrew which are NOT copyrighted (and not your own, which would make it original research) that's the biggest possible help right now. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:33, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Understand. The Shakespeare comparison doesn't work, because Hamlet is a title, and primary topic is Shakekespeare's play. Psalm 22 is no title, and without saying more, some people will think of "The Lord is my Shepherd", and others of "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" - We need to make sure, and soon in the article, which one it is. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:31, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm totally with you on Psalms 22 and 23. My question is for the more obscure Psalms. In my experience (which of course is just me and doesn't count as a source or anything) these Psalms are generally referred to in speech as "Psalm Number X", and not by their first verse. I'm wondering if maybe for a Psalm like 138 we could open with something like: <<"Psalm 138 is the 138th psalm of the Book of Psalms, beginning with, "I will praise thee with my whole heart" (King James Version).>> I'd have just made the change myself to the Psalm in question if I hadn't seen a notice recently that seemed to imply there was some sort of review process needed first on Psalm articles. Alephb (talk) 06:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

For Bach compositions: BWV 2 - Psalm 12 · BWV 17 - Psalm 50 · BWV 135 - Psalm 6 · BWV 148 - Psalm 29 · BWV 104 - Psalm 80 · BWV 187 - Psalm 104 · BWV 71 - Psalm 74 · BWV 120 - Psalm 65 · BWV 171 - Psalm 48 · BWV 196 - Psalm 115 · BWV 48 - Psalm 88 · BWV 193 - Psalm 87, Psalm 121 · BWV 2 - Psalm 12 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:36, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Begun on project opera, it would be nice to monitor and improve articles started by LouisAlain, often biographies from German and French, which have suffered move to draft and various tags, because the referencing in the other Wikipedias is different, and because prose sometimes suffers in translation.

In the following table, I suggest we list articles where improvements by project members would be helpful, newest on top.

• created - day and (short) month
• from - two-digit language code
• cl - class = "draft", "stub"
• ce - copyedit
• ref - better references
• cv - check for copyright violation
• DYK - "p" for planned, "nom" for nominated, later when appeared, day and (short) month

article	created	from	cl	ce	ref	cv	DYK	notes
Erich Gülzow	4 Nov	de			Y			draft to article 15 Apr 2020 by DGG
Birgit Dahlenburg	4 Nov	de			Y			draft to article 28 May 2021 by DGG
Paul Mägi	24 Oct	de			Y			draft to article 8 Mar 2020
Heinz Geese	17 Oct	de	stub				p
Charlotte Pistorius	15 Sep	de			Y		4 Dec	move from draft 18 Oct by MurielMary
Peter Gülke	27 May	de	stub				p
Siegfried Voß	27 May	de	stub					draft to article 21 Jun by Sam Sailor
Roswitha Berndt	8 May	de	stub		Y			draft to article 9 Nov
Elżbieta Szmytka	27 Apr	de		Y	Y		30 May	draft and back 27 Apr
Jon W. Finson	25 Apr	de	stub		N
Wolfgang Hirschmann	18 Apr	de	stub		N
Günther Leib	14 Apr	de		Y	Y		8 Aug	draft 22 Jun, exp and back by Voceditenore 23 Jun
Wolfgang Ruf	17 Apr	de			N
Hanns-Friedrich Kunz	16 April	de		Y	Y		p	from draft 14 Dec by Graham87
Sabine Hass	7 Apr	de	stub
Heinz Imdahl	6 Apr	de	draft	Y	Y		p	to draft 13 Jul
Theo Akkermann	5 Apr	de	draft	N	N			to draft 13 Jul
Walburga Wegner	5 Apr	de	stub
Franz Naval	4 Apr	de	stub
Hermine Küchenmeister-Rudersdorf	4 Apr	de	stub
Erna Denera	4 Apr	de	stub		N
Henny Wolff	3 Apr	de	stub		N
Oscar Fritz Schuh	3 Apr	de	stub	N	N		p
Anke Sieloff	2 Apr	de		Y	Y		22 Aug	back 28 Jun
Gabriele Rossmanith	2 Apr	de	stub	N	N
Leopold Ludwig	2 Apr	de	stub	N	N
Kurt Honolka	1 Apr	de		Y	Y		5 Jan	from draft 12 Nov by DGG
Peter Minich	1 Apr	de	stub	N	N
Julius von Raatz-Brockmann	1 Apr	de	stub		N
Hermann Gallos	31 Mar	de		Y	Y		p	req draft to article 21 Oct, by Graham87 5 Dec
Gerhard Klingenberg	31 Mar	de	stub		N
Manuel Gervink	30 Mar	de		Y				from draft to article 1 Nov
Melanie Diener	28 Mar	de		Y			3 Jul	exp stub 27 May
Wolfgang Martin Schede	28 Mar	de	draft	N	N
Elisabeth Lindermeier	27 Mar	de	draft	Y			p	draft 1 Apr
Christian Elsner	9 Mar	de		Y	Y			draft 1 Apr, back 15 Apr
Bohumil Herlischka	6 Mar	de	C	Y	Y		11 Jul	draft 1 Apr, back 10 Apr, DYKstats
Joseph Kupelwieser	6 Mar	de					27 Oct	drafted, created independently by WQUlrich, that one improved
Heinz Kruse	1 Jan	de		Y	N
Carola Nossek	25 Dec 2018	de		Y	Y			draft 26 Dec, deleted and refunded 23 Jul, back 3 Sep
Gesine Schröder	22 Dec	de		Y	Y			draft 25 Dec, del + back 13 Aug, article 12 Sep
Nicolas Joel	3 Dec 2018	fr		Y	Y		8 Aug	draft 3 Dec, back by 97198 1 Jul

Help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

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)

Please explain the phrase "approved cabal for improvement" that hovers over the article at an angle. It does not look good, particularly on an article focusing on quality. Jmar67 (talk) 12:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

It's a reference to missed user:Br'er Rabbit (compare User talk:Br'er Rabbit/Archive#thanks for fixing my screwups) and meant to disturb. Please see the talk of WP:QAI/missed users for background, next to the image which was taken in memory. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:40, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Brian, we miss you

Brian Boulton, who died on 9 November, was not a member by registration, by what he did, and we thank him.

• He created 106 FAs, did thorough reviews, especially source reviews which others avoid, and served as FA coordinator.
• When some saw a battleground over infoboxes in 2013, he seeked compromise, for operas such as L'Arianna and for classical composers such as Percy Grainger.
• He wrote a dedicated article in The Signpost of 10 July 2013.

Brian, we thank you and will remember your spirit. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

The project is concerned about polishing articles of people who recently died, with the goal to have them appear in the Recent deaths section whare - sadly - Peter Schreier and Harry Kupfer are as I write this. Nominations go to WP:ITNN. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:27, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	Happy New Year, Gerda Arendt! You are receiving this barnstar because, according to this Wikipedia database query, you were the #3 most thanked Wikipedian of 2019, with 1418 entries in Special:Log/thanks during 2019. Congratulations, and, well, thank you for your contributions! Cheers to 2020. Mz7 (talk) 01:12, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Mz7that's nice, just a statistical number, but nice, especially concluding 2019, a year I designated to be the year of thanks. I thank those who thanked me, - it always feels good to receive this little token of one's work being noticed and even liked. I'll transfer the barnstar to project WP:QAI for which I work. We had three topics in 2019, and you can help (you all, I mean, member or not) to work on them:

• Improve Psalms articles which come from stub (Psalm 56) to GA (Psalm 84). Thanks to Yoninah, JohnThorne and many more!
• Expand and source translations by LouisAlain who is probably my most prolific "thanks-giver".
• Polish articles of people who recently died, with the goal to have them appear in the Recent deaths section whare - sadly - Peter Schreier and Harry Kupfer are as I write this. Thanks to Coffeeandcrumbs, Martinevans123, Grimes2 and many more.

Let's make 2020 a year of vision, together! Happy editing in 2020! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

I am passing the thanks to all - members or not - who worked for the project goals: thank you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:27, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Begun in 2018, the project aims for the improvement of articles related to Psalms. A good example is GA Psalm 84, the most recent example Psalm 85, beginning:

{{Psalm nr|85}}

Psalm 85
"LORD, thou hast been favourable unto thy land"
Justitia et pax (Justice and Peace) by an anonymous artist
Other name	"Benedixisti Domine terram tuam"
Text	by Korahites
Language	Hebrew (original)

Psalm 85 is the 85th psalm of the Book of Psalms, beginning in English in the King James Version: "LORD, thou hast been favourable unto thy land". In the Greek Septuagint version of the Bible, and in the Latin Vulgate, this psalm is Psalm 84 in a slightly different numbering system. In Latin, it is known as "Benedixisti Domine terram tuam". In Judaism, it is called "a psalm of returned exiles". The psalm is attributed to the sons of Korah.

The psalm is a regular part of Jewish, Catholic, Anglican and Protestant liturgies. It was paraphrased in hymns and set to music. Its image of Justice and Peace kissing was a popular theme for artworks from the Middle Ages through the 18th century.

Things to look for

Lead

• the beginning in English, to make it recognizable
• the Septuagint/Vulgate number if different
• the beginning in Latin, traditional use, also in compositions
• author and time if known
• a summary of use in liturgy and music

optional: summary of content, special features, commentary, similarity/relation to other psalms

Text and theme

It is nice to have at least some text, in Hebrew and English. Unfortunately, a 2019 discussion resulted in the removal of the direct translation from Hebrew. The English King James Version is Wikipedia's free source, but is often old-fashioned English, and deviating in meaning. Such differences need to pointed out specifically, - not as would be conbvenient by having two translations next to each other.

For some psalms, the verse numbering is different, this should also be mentioned.

Liturgical use

Subdivided by denominations

Musical settings

This section can get very long, then consider a list or table. If hymns are derived from the psalm they should come first, because often other music is based on them.

Typical links are given - as a model - for Psalm 85:

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

Psalm 85

Wikimedia Commons has media related to WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Archive 1.

• Pieces with text from Psalm 85: Scores at the International Music Score Library Project
• WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Archive 1: Free scores at the Choral Public Domain Library (ChoralWiki)
• Psalms Chapter 85 תְּהִלִּים text in Hebrew and English, mechon-mamre.org
• Text of Psalm 85 according to the 1928 Psalter
• Psalm 85 – Praying for Revival and Restoration text and detailed commentary, enduringword.com
• For the leader. A psalm of the Korahites. / You once favored, LORD, your land, / restored the captives of Jacob. text and footnotes, usccb.org Unites States Conference of Catholic Bishops
• PSAL. LXXXV. translation by John Milton, dartmouth.edu
• Psalm 85:1 introduction and text, biblestudytools.com
• Psalm 85 / Refrain: Show us your mercy, O Lord. Church of England
• Psalm 85 at biblegateway.com
• Advent 3: Gaudete in Domino chantblog.blogspot.com 2008
• Charles H. Spurgeon: Psalm 85 detailed commentary, archive.spurgeon.org
• "Hymns for Psalm 85". hymnary.org. Retrieved 25 February 2020.

For Bach compositions: BWV 2 - Psalm 12 · BWV 17 - BWV 48 - Psalm 88 · BWV 71 - Psalm 74 · BWV 120 - Psalm 65 · BWV 135 - Psalm 6 · BWV 148 - Psalm 29 · BWV 171 - Psalm 48 · BWV 187 - Psalm 104 · BWV 193 - Psalm 87 · BWV 196 - Psalm 115 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Also for Elijah (oratorio): Psalm 7 · Psalm 16 · Psalm 25 · Psalm 34 · Psalm 59 · Psalm 71 · Psalm 86 · Psalm 88 · Psalm 108 · Psalm 128 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:16, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Begun in 2019 on project opera, we monitor and improve articles started by prolific translator LouisAlain, often biographies from German and French, which have suffered move to draft and various tags, because the referencing in the other Wikipedias is different, and because prose sometimes suffers in translation.

In the following table, I suggest we list articles where improvements by project members would be helpful, newest on top.

• created - day and (short) month
• from - two-digit language code
• cl - class = "draft", "stub"
• ce - copyedit
• ref - better references
• cv - check for copyright violation
• DYK - "p" for planned, "nom" for nominated, later when appeared, day and (short) month

article	created	from	cl	ce	ref	DYK	notes
Draft:Yves Robert (musician)	6 Feb	fr	draft	Y	Y		by Helohe
Reinhard Pfundt	2 Jun	de		Y	Y		draft to article 4 Jun by Robert McClenon
Karl Friedrich (tenor)	2 Oct 2019	de			Y		draft to article 27 Aug by Calliopejen1

article	created	from	cl	ce	ref	DYK	notes
Erich Gülzow	4 Nov 2019	de			Y		draft to article 15 Apr by DGG
Birgit Dahlenburg	4 Nov 2019	de			Y		draft to article 28 May 2021 by DGG
Franz Klarwein	3 Nov 2019	de			Y	16 May	from draft 7 Apr by El C
Paul Mägi	24 Oct 2019	de			Y	13 Apr	from draft 8 Mar by Estopedist1
Heinz Geese	17 Oct 2019	de	stub			p
Peter Gülke	27 May 2019	de	stub			p
Siegfried Voß	27 May 2019	de	stub				from draft 21 Jun 2019 by Sam Sailor
Anja Augustin	6 May 2019	de			Y		from draft 17 Mar by El C
Jon W. Finson	25 Apr 2019	de	stub		N
Wolfgang Hirschmann	18 Apr 2019	de	stub		N
Wolfgang Ruf	17 Apr 2019	de			N
Hanns-Friedrich Kunz	16 Apr 2019	de		Y	Y		from draft 14 Dec 2019 by Graham87
Sabine Hass	7 Apr 2019	de	stub
Heinz Imdahl	6 Apr 2019	de		Y	Y	24 Apr	to draft 13 Jul, back 28 Mar by DGG
Theo Akkermann	5 Apr 2019	de		Y	Y	p	to draft 13 Jul 2019, back 20 Jun
Walburga Wegner	5 Apr 2019	de	stub
Franz Naval	4 Apr 2019	de	stub
Hermine Küchenmeister-Rudersdorf	4 Apr 2019	de	stub
Erna Denera	4 Apr 2019	de	stub		N
Henny Wolff	3 Apr 2019	de	stub		Y	16 Apr
Oscar Fritz Schuh	3 Apr 2019	de	stub	N	N	p
Gabriele Rossmanith	2 Apr 2019	de	stub	N	N
Leopold Ludwig	2 Apr 2019	de	stub	N	N
Peter Minich	1 Apr 2019	de	stub	Y	Y	22 Apr	expanded by Charles01 12 Mar
Julius von Raatz-Brockmann	1 Apr 2019	de	stub		N
Gerhard Klingenberg	31 Mar 2019	de	stub		N
Carl Michalski	29 Mar 2019	de		Y	Y		from draft 9 Mar by El C
Wolfgang Martin Schede	28 Mar 2019	de	draft	Y	N
Elisabeth Lindermeier	27 Mar 2019	de		Y		25 Apr	draft 1 Apr 2019, back 9 Mar
Heinz Kruse	1 Jan 2019	de		Y	N

Articles Nicolas Joel, Joseph Kupelwieser, Bohumil Herlischka, Melanie Diener, Kurt Honolka, Anke Sieloff, Elżbieta Szmytka and Charlotte Pistorius were rescued in 2019 and appeared on DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:39, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Begun in 2019, the project is concerned about the quality of articles of people who recently died and listed here:

• work on tags
• references
• expansion

When the quality is good enough, they can appear in the Recent deaths section of the Main page. Nominations go to WP:ITNN. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:55, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Margit Otto-Crépin died, article of an equestrien silver-medal winner is a stub. I know little, even the German article isn't great. Montanabw, for equestrian? LouisAlain, for French? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Brian, we miss you

Brian Boulton, who died on 9 December 2019, was not a member by registration, by what he did, and we thank him.

• He created 106 FAs, did thorough reviews, especially source reviews which others avoid, and served as FA coordinator.
• When some saw a battleground over infoboxes in 2013, he seeked compromise, for operas such as L'Arianna and for classical composers such as Percy Grainger.
• He wrote a dedicated article in The Signpost of 10 July 2013.

Brian, we thank you and will remember your spirit. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Add them to articles that you write yourself. Ignore discussions, ignore ignore ignore. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:49, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

This is why there are problems

The reason why there are problems surrounding infoboxes is because of stupid remarks like this. When analysed, you're basically saying, add a box and ignore the rules. Who's the disruptive one? Not me. Cassianto^Talk 15:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

What in the clause "that you write yourself" is hard to understand? We can get wordier if needed:

• Feel free to add an infobox ONLY if you wrote the article yourself.
• If you are not an article's principal editor, best leave the right corner as you find it.

• If you can't resist the urge to change it - adding or removing - be prepared to be reverted and then better walk away.
• If you plan to become an article's principal editor, be polite and suggest a change on the talk.

• Don't waste time in infobox discussions.

Write articles. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

• Nope, no one OWNS an article; it is subject to discussion and consensus, with BRD being the way to go (with those adding an infobox being the bold edit). Cassianto^Talk 16:58, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Not owning is a nice theory, but hasn't worked. I could give you past examples, but we could also look at a better future. - I have heard your idea of declaring an edit which established a feature that readers became used to over many years suddenly as "bold" years later, but I don't follow. - Tell me, where do you even see "problems surrounding infoboxes"? Name one or two, please, just article name. (Because I don't see any.) - Different topic: I hear a lot about Brian's spirit. I don't remember him calling the edits of others "disruptive" or "stupid", at least not to me. I remember him as the person who tried compromise. A good model. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:16, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

It's not my idea, it's from the school of Common Sense. You have to add an infobox for it to be removed. Bold comes before revert. Why is that so difficult to understand? Cassianto^Talk 19:45, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Let's see. I believe that you have a different concept of "revert" than I have. We don't revert things, we revert edits. When a vandal removes a paragraph, I revert which then means adding. If a vandal writes something indecent, I revert which then means removing.

Let's look at an example. Franz Mazura. On 24 Jan, LeQuattroStagioni added a table for the recordings. Someone more prose-oriented might not like it, and revert as bold. I agree that this would be acceptable within a week, perhaps even two, but to remove that table in 2027 would make no sense to me.

Imagine that everybody, regarding infoboxes, only cared about the articles he or she creates, and leaves those of others alone - and this is what I suggested in my "stupid" edit - we'd have an outbreak of peace. Perhaps try it? - In case you don't know: "ignore ignore ignore" is a quote, of the best advice I ever received on Wikipedia, in 2012, before I even knew about infoboxes. I should have listened more often. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:12, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm afraid I can't quite understand most of that, but I feel we're not going to agree anyway, so let's leave things there. Cassianto^Talk 22:26, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

You mean you leave, and still call my edit which was meant as a suggestion for peace "stupid"? Why is it so difficult to understand why a removal of the recordings table in 2027 would not make sense to me? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

How is it peaceful adding warring an infobox in place and then refusing to discuss with others when it is reverted? That's a recipe for disaster. Because you were bold, it got reverted, and you should discuss. There is no time limit. Cassianto^Talk 22:47, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't think you like to answer questions. I count four just above that you didn't answer, one of them being where you see a problem, such as "adding warring", - because I don't see it. Where was I bold? (To begin with.) - There was no serious infobox conflict for three years, - I almost forgot the topic infoboxes when I wrote this project's plans for 2020: Psalms - LouisAlain - Recent deaths. - When I remembered that "we" are known for infoboxes I added one line. Where is "adding warring" if everybody stays with self-made articles? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

As you see that the above was thoroughly misunderstood, a more wordy version of the same, as can be found on the talk of SilkTork:

Advice (or warning), dear user who may think an infobox is a normal feature of an article, passing at-a-glance information to a reader who may need no more:

• When you see a featured article (FA, with a little star in the upper right corner) without an infobox, there is a reason. You waste less time (not only yours but those of fellow editors) by not even thinking to change the status.
• If you can't resist the thought, and see the hidden notice not to add an infobox, withdraw.
• If you are still on some mission, add one but unwatch the article (as said in the thread above).
• If you keep watching and see it reverted, best ignore.
• If you can't ignore, begin a talk page discussion, per WP:BRD.

Same is true for normal articles, of course, but the more FA, the longer the discussion will be. Consider to instead work against this backlog, seriously. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:58, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

calling heaven and earth to be glad

Welcome to 2021, hopefully a year of taking courage and encouragement!

Ongoing projects:

• Improve Psalms articles
• Expand and source translations
• Polish articles of people who recently died
• Infoboxes
• Gnomish tasks

Thanks to all - member or not - who worked for the project goals in 2020! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Project members have worked towrads improving the quality of articles about Bach's cantatas which come from stub to FA such as Erschallet, ihr Lieder, erklinget, ihr Saiten! BWV 172. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

• For articles with long German titles, begin the lead with the known composer:

  Johann Sebastian Bach composed the church cantata Die Elenden sollen essen (The miserable shall eat), BWV 75, in Leipzig for the first Sunday after Trinity and first performed it on 30 May 1723.

• For articles with short titles rather use:

  The Magnificat in E-flat major, BWV 243a, also BWV 243.1, is a choral composition by Johann Sebastian Bach.

• "BWV" should be bold and not linked, to make the redirect clearly visible
• Infobox: no "File:" needed for images, no links for instruments
• Mark foreign-language text with {{lang}}, which (now) renders that text italic, unless prevented by "italic=no" or "italic=unset" for items, where italics are only for parts
• Link uncommon terms on first occurrence in both lead and body: ] · ] · ] · ] · ] · ] ] ensemble · ] and similar terms
• Link an occasion to the liturgical occasion in Church cantata which has the readings, which is usually more helpful than a general article
• Watch for chronology: first compose, then perform
• link Dahn chorales

  * Luke Dahn:  bach-chorales.com

• Take the article from a highly developed article: level 2 Music, level 3 Structure and scoring + Movements
• Mention original title if available
• Mention duration if available

• Consider sfn referencing
• Use Bach Digital as a high quality source
• Use the online version of Dürr/Jones with individual page numbers if available
• Bach Cantatas Website has been regarded as unreliable, - avoid but it still offers the most detailed information about recordings
• Julian Mincham has been regarded as unreliable and should be referenced with care, as self-published and rather personal
• Provide translations with a source, check if longer excerpts than an incipit make more sense
• In refs: remove "PDF"
• Use consistently: Bach Digital, Bach Cantatas Website
• Make sure book links come with ".com" (vs. individual languages)
• Link authors and publications
• Be specific about type of citation, such as journal, AV media notes, encyclopedia
• Find Gardiner liner notes at Hyperion, https://www.hyperion-records.co.uk/find.asp?f=%22bwv+125%22+gardiner
• Find BIS liner notes: http://bis.se/orchestras-ensembles/bach-collegium-japan/js-bach-the-complete-sacred-cantatas
• Find Briliant Classics liner notes: http://www.brilliantclassics.com/media/776946/94940-js-bach-complete-edition-liner-notes-sung-texts-download.pdf
• Find reviews: http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2008/Mar08/Bach_3_sdg141.htm

• Avoid "Selected"
• Use simple introduction
• Use choir type only if OVPP recordings exist
• Avoid mentioning "sortable"
• Supply a name for a table of recordings
• Avoid red background
• Check for new recordings
• Do not rely on BCW alone

• Excellent: Bach's autograph manuscripts
• Good: instruments, performers, prints of hymns, performance places
• Avoid: the image of Young Bach as doubtful, and the image of Old Bach unless it's a late work

• Expand lead
• Make tables of both movements and recordings

• Insert sections background, publication and reception
• Word alt text for images
• Have subheaders for movements, provide incipit and translation for each, use toc limit

Begun in 2019 on project opera, we monitor and improve articles started by prolific translator LouisAlain, often biographies from German and French, which have suffered move to draft and various tags, because the referencing in the other Wikipedias is different, and because prose sometimes suffers in translation.

In the following table, I suggest we list articles where improvements by project members would be helpful, newest on top.

• created - day and (short) month
• from - two-digit language code
• cl - class = "draft", "stub"
• ce - copyedit
• ref - better references
• cv - check for copyright violation
• DYK - "p" for planned, "nom" for nominated, later when appeared, day and (short) month

2020

article	created	from	cl	ce	ref	DYK	notes
Yves Robert (musician)	6 Feb 2020	fr		Y	Y		by Helohe, from draft by El C 13 Jan 2021

Several articles were rescued in 2020, and some appeared on DYK. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Begun in 2019, the project is concerned about the quality of articles of people who recently died and listed here:

• work on tags
• references
• expansion

When the quality is good enough soon enough, an article can appear in the Recent deaths section of the Main page, with nominations to WP:ITNN. A new or sufficiently expanded article can (also) appear on DYK --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Begun in 2018, the project aims for the improvement of articles related to Psalms. A good example is GA Psalm 84, but Psalm 85 is also a fine example:

{{Psalm nr|85}}

Psalm 85
"LORD, thou hast been favourable unto thy land"
Justitia et pax (Justice and Peace) by an anonymous artist
Other name	"Benedixisti Domine terram tuam"
Text	by Korahites
Language	Hebrew (original)

Psalm 85 is the 85th psalm of the Book of Psalms, beginning in English in the King James Version: "LORD, thou hast been favourable unto thy land". In the Greek Septuagint version of the Bible, and in the Latin Vulgate, this psalm is Psalm 84 in a slightly different numbering system. In Latin, it is known as "Benedixisti Domine terram tuam". In Judaism, it is called "a psalm of returned exiles". The psalm is attributed to the sons of Korah.

The psalm is a regular part of Jewish, Catholic, Anglican and Protestant liturgies. It was paraphrased in hymns and set to music. Its image of Justice and Peace kissing was a popular theme for artworks from the Middle Ages through the 18th century.

Things to look for

Lead

• the beginning in English, to make it recognizable
• the Septuagint/Vulgate number if different
• the beginning in Latin, traditional use, also in compositions
• author and time if known
• a summary of use in liturgy and music

optional: summary of content, special features, commentary, similarity/relation to other psalms

Text and theme

It is nice to have at least some text, in Hebrew and English. Unfortunately, a 2019 discussion resulted in the removal of the direct translation from Hebrew. The English King James Version is Wikipedia's free source, but is often old-fashioned English, and deviating in meaning. Such differences need to pointed out specifically, - not as would be convenient by having two translations next to each other.

For some psalms, the verse numbering is different, this should also be mentioned.

Liturgical use

Subdivided by denominations

Musical settings

This section can get very long, then consider a list or table. If hymns are derived from the psalm they should come first, because often other music is based on them.

Typical links are given - as a model - for Psalm 85:

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

Psalm 85

Wikimedia Commons has media related to WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Archive 1.

• Pieces with text from Psalm 85: Scores at the International Music Score Library Project
• WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Archive 1: Free scores at the Choral Public Domain Library (ChoralWiki)
• Psalms Chapter 85 תְּהִלִּים text in Hebrew and English, mechon-mamre.org
• Text of Psalm 85 according to the 1928 Psalter
• Psalm 85 – Praying for Revival and Restoration text and detailed commentary, enduringword.com
• For the leader. A psalm of the Korahites. / You once favored, LORD, your land, / restored the captives of Jacob. text and footnotes, usccb.org Unites States Conference of Catholic Bishops
• PSAL. LXXXV. translation by John Milton, dartmouth.edu
• Psalm 85:1 introduction and text, biblestudytools.com
• Psalm 85 / Refrain: Show us your mercy, O Lord. Church of England
• Psalm 85 at biblegateway.com
• Advent 3: Gaudete in Domino chantblog.blogspot.com 2008
• Charles H. Spurgeon: Psalm 85 detailed commentary, archive.spurgeon.org
• "Hymns for Psalm 85". hymnary.org. Retrieved 25 February 2020.

For Bach compositions: BWV 2 - Psalm 12 · BWV 48 - Psalm 88 · BWV 71 - Psalm 74 · BWV 120 - Psalm 65 · BWV 135 - Psalm 6 · BWV 148 - Psalm 29 · BWV 171 - Psalm 48 · BWV 193 - Psalm 87

Also for Elijah (oratorio): Psalm 7 Y · Psalm 16 · Psalm 34 · Psalm 59 · Psalm 86 Y· Psalm 88 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

It's a myth that project members are fanatic about infoboxes ;) - The typical member will add them to articles as a different level of accessibility. It is safe to add one to a self-made article, and a waste of time to discuss them with those who don't like them.

If you think an infobox is a normal feature of an article, passing at-a-glance information to a reader who may need no more, please respect the following:

• When you see a featured article (FA, with a little star in the upper right corner) without an infobox, there is a reason. You waste less time (not only yours but those of fellow editors) by not even thinking to change the status.
• If you can't resist the thought of adding one, but see a hidden notice in edit mode not to add an infobox (without a proposal on the talk), withdraw.
• If you are still on some mission, add one but unwatch the article.
• If you keep watching and see it reverted, best ignore.
• If you can't ignore, begin a talk page discussion, per WP:BRD.

The same is true for normal articles, of course, but the more FA, the longer the discussion will be. Consider to instead work against this backlog, seriously. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

• Checking for spelling mistakes
• Checking for unclosed new-line html <br>, replace by <br />
• Checking for direct links to foreign-language Wikipedias, replace by {{ill}}
• Applying {{lang}} to foreign-language text
• Observing WP:Colons and asterisks by RexxS, and make others do the same
• Providing navboxes, especially for operas which so far had sidebars, and providing images or infoboxes instead of deleted sidebars
• Replacing deprecated {{harv}} by {{sfn}}
• Checking deletion proposals

Feel free to add to this everywhere, list your articles for review, chat. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Dropping a line on the talk pages of relevant WikiProjects that a new article improvement newsletter has opened for sign-ups and is sending out its first issue in the next couple of days. Discontent Content focuses on both the improvement of substandard articles and the maintenance of quality ones, and can be subscribed to at Wikipedia:Discontent Content/mailing list. Vaticidalprophet 05:21, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

This Talk page is unlike any I have seen before and appears to be used more as a guide. I hope this is the correct place to put this message.

While reading the project page, I noticed a very odd... I don't know what to call it. Typographic anomaly? The phrase "approved cabal for improvement" appears as apparently floating text, rotated upward about 15°, moving to different locations of the page when I view the project's page, its text source, or an old revision. On the main project page itself, at least on my monitor, the text appears in the Scope section, obscuring the word the in "several members are female, and the others also care..." (Emphasis mine, to show placement.) If my written description is unclear, let me know so I can provide a screenshot.

If this text is intentional, might I suggest changing its display to be a consistent position? If its position I described above is intentional, might I suggest a different term than cabal? The position and wording of the text seem to imply feminists belong to a cabal, which I hope is not the intended message. While the term's usage is technically accurate, according to the Merriam–Webster dictionary, the term often carries a negative connotation. If it's meant to be a humorous way of defining the group, I still feel it might be a wise idea to anchor the text somewhere.
~ JDCAce | user | talk | contributions ~ 05:16, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

JDCAce, please see if the thread in the archive (below the TOC) under the same title tells you enough, about memory of a missed friend and founder of this project. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:12, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the quick response. I suppose since I am only the second person to be confused by this in seven years, it's probably not important to change it. You and the group at large have my condolences.
~ JDCAce | user | talk | contributions ~ 07:19, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

100,000 feature-quality articles? CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 08:55, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

we are not counting ;) - begin with listing yours for review on top, and comment on those listed --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:12, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I am preparing, since the article is clearly still missing something... typical for stuff related to Elon Musk tweets and private spaceflight. It is difficult to say the least. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 09:18, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

no rush, enjoy building! - do some reviewing, please, that introduces you to the TFA people you will have to convince, not Jesu, meine Freude (has enough support) but those missing comments --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:27, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Alright! I will review some :) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 10:09, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to 2022, hopefully a year of friendship!

Ongoing projects:

• Improve Psalms articles
• Improve or write articles of people who recently died
• Bach cantatas
• Gnomish tasks

Thanks to all - member or not - who worked for the project goals in 2021! It was especially great for new writers of featured articles (FA):

• Portrait of a Musician by Aza24
• The Thankful Poor, Piano Sonata No. 31 (Beethoven) and Symphony No. 4 (Mahler) by General Poxter
• R. A. B. Mynors by Modussiccandi
• Huey Long by HAL333
• Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji by Toccata Quarta
• Carillon by Thrakkx
• Tyler Skaggs by GhostRiver

That's promising! Let's keep writing and reviewing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

In 2022: more new FAs by new writers:

• Sei pezzi per pianoforte by Wretchskull
• SLAPP Suits by theleekycauldron

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:30, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

• Streets (song) by Your Power
• Royal necropolis of Byblos by Elias Ziade

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:48, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

To be done:

• for Bach compositions: BWV 48 - Psalm 88 · BWV 71 - Psalm 74 · BWV 120 - Psalm 65 · BWV 135 - Psalm 6 · BWV 148 - Psalm 29 · BWV 171 - Psalm 48 · BWV 193 - Psalm 87
• for Elijah (oratorio): Psalm 34 · Psalm 59 · Psalm 88 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

• Checking for spelling mistakes
• Checking for unclosed new-line html <br>, replace by <br />
• Checking for direct links to foreign-language Wikipedias, replace by {{ill}}
• Applying {{lang}} to foreign-language text
• Observing WP:Colons and asterisks by RexxS, and make others do the same
• Replacing deprecated {{harv}} by {{sfn}}
• Checking deletion proposals

Feel free to add to this everywhere, list your articles for review, chat. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

• SpaceX Starship to this January 2022, hopefully in February and TFA on 6 May 2022 to commemorate 1 year anniversary of Starship SN15 insane launch and SpaceX 20th birthday! CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 10:12, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

  I failed. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 03:07, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

  no problem unless for you, - how about 2- year anniversary? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:48, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

  Yeah, I think I will give up for now, the subject is just too new and riddled with speculations. Thanks for your encouragement though! CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 07:03, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to 2023, hopefully a year of resilience!

Ongoing projects:

• Improve Psalms articles, about half of them improved since the project began
• Improve or write articles of people who recently died
• Bach cantatas

In 2022, new writers brought articles to FA, and (some of them) TFA:

• SLAPP Suits by theleekycauldron
• Streets (song) by (now) Your Power
• Margaret Abbott by Kavyansh.Singh

Gnomish tasks include:

• check for spelling mistakes
• check for links to current countries, capitals, languages, and remove them, per WP:OVERLINK
• check for unclosed new-line html <br>, replace by <br />
• check for direct links to foreign-language Wikipedias, replace by {{ill}}
• apply {{lang}} to foreign-language text
• observe WP:Colons and asterisks by RexxS, and make others do the same
• replace deprecated {{harv}} by {{sfn}}
• check if talk page headers fulfill the function for which they were meant: guidance on contentious pages.

Infoboxes:

• Project members generally welcome infoboxes, as a means of WP:Accessibility, but don't pursue them against known wishes by principal editors, per User:RexxS/Infobox factors by RexxS. All RfCs of recent years supported the use of a concise infobox over no infobox, last (and only in 2022): Laurence Olivier. It would be nice if the term "infobox warrior" would become unused in 2023.

Feel free to add to this, list your articles for review, chat. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I have not been able to find a member userbox for this WikiProject to put onto my userpage. I made a proposal here:] Perhaps others could help out. I'm not an expert at creating userboxes.

Thanks, GloryRoad66 (talk) 23:07, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

I came up with one (for at least the time being:

This user is a participant in QAI (Quality Article Improvement).

But, I welcome anyone to improve its design. GloryRoad66 (talk) 05:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Here is the page if anyone wants to edit the userbox. GloryRoad66 (talk) 07:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

I just made a few more modifications to the design of the userbox (see above), so that now the it better reflects the visual themes presented on the main page of this WikiProject. I found a better template format that allows for the use of phots and images. You'll notice that the userbox now has the beautiful sunset photo and the orange border. If you have any further improvements you wish to make, you can go to Template:User WikiProject Quality Article Improvement. GloryRoad66 (talk) 22:18, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

In 2023, it's been 10 years that we had WP:arbinfobox, which is also 10 years of growing openness for the insight that composers are also human beings, - see 10 years. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

As it's ongoing, here's the list, begun on 15 March:

article	diff	by user	date	discussion	notes
Astor Piazzolla	add	IP	12 Sep 2007
Robert Zollitsch (composer)	create	Galanga	12 Sep 2010
Rolf Liebermann	add	Lugnuts	9 Mar 2011
Étienne Méhul	add	Magnus Manske	12 Jul 2012
Clara Schumann	add	Sixtyseemonkey	12 Sep 2012
George Gershwin	add	Hhfjbaker	28 Nov 2012
Ilse Weber	add	Kschlot1	16 Nov 2012
Robert Stoepel	add	kosboot	4 Mar 2013	disc
Peter Planyavsky	start	Gerda Arendt	4 Mar 2013
Erwin Schulhoff	add	Aarp65	11 Sep 2013
Percy Grainger	experiment	Brian Boulton	29 Oct 2013
Dmitry Bortniansky	risk	Duckduckstop	24 Feb 2014
Imogen Holst	add	Brian Boulton	12 Mar 2014
Erich Wolfgang Korngold	add	IP	3 Sep 2014
Albert Ketèlbey	add	Abc2266	28 Jan 2015
Frédéric Chopin	RfC consensus	Brian Boulton	19 Feb 2015	2014, 2015, 2022	restored in 2023
Anton Rubinstein	add	Tetsuo	10 Mar 2015
Javier Álvarez	add	TobiasAD	26 Apr 2015
Ludwig van Beethoven	RfC consensus	Worm That Turned	7 July 2015	RfC
Aram Khachaturian	add	Marcus1093	14 May 2015
Leonard Bernstein	add	IP	22 Aug 2015
Edvard Grieg	add	IP	5 Sep 2015
Johann Sebastian Bach	add	Nyetoson	14 Oct 2015	disc 2013
Zacharia Paliashvili	add	Damianmx	14 Jan 2016
Gian Carlo Menotti	add	Apokrifos	28 Jan 2016
Carl Orff	add	BPK2	2 May 2016
Max Reger	try	Gerda Arendt	9 May 2016	disc
Maxim Berezovsky	add	Shiesmine	12 Feb 2017
Robert Schumann	add	Nmtri2007	13 May 2017
Max Bruch	add	Ezhao02	21 Jul 2017
Alexander Scriabin	add	Railfan01	21 Sep 2017
John Cage	add	Cs california	3 Feb 2018
Ferdinando Paer	try	Gerda Arendt	27 Apr 2018
Andrée Vaurabourg	add	Peaceray	23 Jun 2018
Carl Friedrich Rungenhagen	add	Bonnie13J	10 March 2019
Ethel Smyth	add	WomenArtistUpdates	6 May 2019
Johann Strauss II	add	Makkkkus	25 Jan 2020
Jörg Widmann	try	Gerda Arendt	6 Feb 2020
Judith Weir	add	Willwal1	17 Mar 2020
Elena Kats-Chernin	add	Maryphillips1952	23 Sep 2020
Amy Beach	created	Maryphillips1952	24 Sep 2020
Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji	per PR comments	Toccata quarta	23 Nov 2020
George Enescu	add	RAMSES$44932	14 Apr 2021
Paul Hindemith	add	Gerda Arendt	20 May 2021
Nadia Boulanger	add	Evanszoe	21 Jun 2021
Franz Liszt	add	Chariotsacha	18 Jul 2021
Henryk Wieniawski	add	JeffreyViolin	31 Jul 2021
Jean Sibelius	try	Gerda Arendt	8 Dec 2021	disc
Ernst Krenek	add	Moshtrofontz	20 Jan 2022
Darius Milhaud	add	Valentinejoesmith	27 Jan 2022
György Kurtág	add	Mandtplatt	22 Feb 2022
Karol Szymanowski	add	IP	4 Apr 2022
Heitor Villa-Lobos	add	Thi	22 Jun 2022
Artemy Vedel	add	Gerda Arendt	9 Sep 2022
Boris Blacher	add	Toadboy123	26 Sep 2022
Anton Webern	add	MONTENSEM	7 Oct 2022
Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky	RfC consensus	Shibbolethink	5 Jan 2023	RfC
Carl Maria von Weber	add	Mabcmiller	15 Jan 2023
Sergei Prokofiev	add	Pearman2	16 Feb 2023
Johannes Brahms	finally	Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov	24 Feb 2023
Alban Berg	add	Engineerchange	26 Feb 2023
Zoltán Kodály	add	Dseay2	3 Mar 2023
Igor Stravinsky	add	MyCatIsAChonk	9 Mar 2023
Carl Nielsen	add	Silence of Järvenpää	29 Mar 2023	disc
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart	RfC consensus	Shibbolethink	30 Mar 2023	RfC
Giacomo Puccini	no objection	UndercoverClassicist	3 Jun 2023
Clarence Barlow	add	IP	29 Jun 2023
Revaz Lagidze	create	LeontinaVarlamonva	3 Jul 2023
Dmitri Shostakovich	add	EthanCheung19	5 Jul 2023
Richard Wagner	RfC consensus	PackMecEng	5 Aug 2023	RfC
Serge Koussevitzky	add	Dronebogus	1 Aug 2023
Alfred Schnittke	restore	CurryTime7-24	10 Aug 2023
Felix Mendelssohn	RfC consensus	PackMecEng	11 Aug 2023	RfC

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:59, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

last update: --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:05, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

... is up for GA reassassment. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

and delisted --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:34, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year

write articles
add articles here for review
review
make gnomish improvements
improve accessibility
exchange thoughts

• The Recent deaths project, improving or writing articles of people who recently died, begun in 2019, continues.
• The Bach cantatas project, active from the beginnnning in 2012, is a special focus in 2024, 300 years after Bach began his cycle of chorale cantatas.

The Psalms project of the last years was completed!

• check for spelling mistakes
• check for links to current countries, capitals, languages, and remove them, per WP:OVERLINK
• check for unclosed new-line html <br>, replace by <br />
• check for direct links to foreign-language Wikipedias, replace by {{ill}}
• apply {{lang}} to foreign-language texts, with {{langr}} when they should not be automatically italic
• observe WP:Colons and asterisks by RexxS
• replace deprecated {{harv}} by {{sfn}}
• check if talk page headers fulfill the function for which they were meant: guidance on contentious pages

Inform other users about these things, hoping to make them do the same. 8 January, updated --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Project members generally welcome infoboxes, as a means of WP:Accessibility, but don't pursue them against known wishes by principal editors, per User:RexxS/Infobox factors by RexxS. All RfCs of recent years supported the use of a concise infobox over no infobox, last (and only in 2022): Laurence Olivier. It would be nice if the term "infobox warrior" would become unused in 2024.

Feel free to add to the tasks, list your articles for review, chat. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:41, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

In 2023, it was 10 years that we had WP:arbinfobox, which also means 10 years of growing openness for the insight that composers are also human beings, - see 10 years. Yes, a 2010 RfC of WP:COMPOSERS recommended not to have, one which led to a removal of many of them. The history can best be studied looking at Mozart, because he is a composer of general interest, and the article has no particular principal writer.

The process goes on. A list of composers where an infobox was added without objection, often by community consensus, was begun on 15 March 2023. I doesn't include the countless cases where editors simply added an infobox to articles they wrote or improved.

article	diff	by user	date	discussion	notes
Astor Piazzolla	add	IP	21 Feb 2007
Pablo de Sarasate	add	Dirac1933	10 Apr 2007
Giovanni Battista Viotti	add	Emerson7	13 Jul 2007
Randall Thompson	add	Nunh-huh	12 Sep 2008
Scott Joplin	add	Morahman7vn	3 Mar 2009
Wojciech Kilar	add	Romuald Wróblewski	27 Nov 2009
Charles Ives	add	Member	21 Mar 2010
Robert Zollitsch (composer)	create	Galanga	12 Sep 2010
Rolf Liebermann	add	Lugnuts	9 Mar 2011
Alma Mahler	add	Marinna	10 May 2011
Étienne Méhul	add	Magnus Manske	12 Jul 2012
Clara Schumann	add	Sixtyseemonkey	12 Sep 2012
George Gershwin	add	Hhfjbaker	28 Nov 2012
Ilse Weber	add	Kschlot1	16 Nov 2012
Robert Stoepel	add	kosboot	4 Mar 2013	disc
Peter Planyavsky	start	Gerda Arendt	4 Mar 2013
Erwin Schulhoff	add	Aarp65	11 Sep 2013
Percy Grainger	experiment	Brian Boulton	29 Oct 2013
Johann Mattheson	add	Hebrides	23 Jan 2014
Dmitry Bortniansky	risk	Duckduckstop	24 Feb 2014
Imogen Holst	add	Brian Boulton	12 Mar 2014
Alexander Kobrin	exp	Montanabw	15 Jul 2014
Erich Wolfgang Korngold	add	IP	3 Sep 2014
Albert Ketèlbey	add	Abc2266	28 Jan 2015
Frédéric Chopin	RfC consensus	Brian Boulton	19 Feb 2015	2014, 2015, 2022	restored in 2023
Anton Rubinstein	add	Tetsuo	10 Mar 2015
Javier Álvarez	add	TobiasAD	26 Apr 2015
Johann Nepomuk Hummel	add	Car780	11 Jun 2015
Aram Khachaturian	add	Marcus1093	14 May 2015
Ludwig van Beethoven	RfC consensus	Worm That Turned	7 Jul 2015	RfC
Leonard Bernstein	add	IP	22 Aug 2015
Edvard Grieg	add	IP	5 Sep 2015
Roman Kofman	create	Sanya7901	12 Sep 2015
Johann Sebastian Bach	add	Nyetoson	14 Oct 2015	disc 2013
Zacharia Paliashvili	add	Damianmx	14 Jan 2016
Gian Carlo Menotti	add	Apokrifos	28 Jan 2016
Carl Orff	add	BPK2	2 May 2016
Max Reger	try	Gerda Arendt	9 May 2016	disc
Joaquín Turina	add	Pigsonthewing	28 Sep 2016
Maxim Berezovsky	add	Shiesmine	12 Feb 2017
Robert Schumann	add	Nmtri2007	13 May 2017
Max Bruch	add	Ezhao02	21 Jul 2017
Alexander Scriabin	add	Railfan01	21 Sep 2017
Alberto Ginastera	add	Aboudaqn	26 Oct 2017
John Cage	add	Cs california	3 Feb 2018
Alexander Goehr	add	IP	25 Mar 2018
Ferdinando Paer	try	Gerda Arendt	27 Apr 2018
Andrée Vaurabourg	add	Peaceray	23 Jun 2018
Reinhold Glière	add	IP	26 Aug 2018
Mark-Anthony Turnage	add	GeorgeMHall	25 Dec 2018
Carl Friedrich Rungenhagen	add	Bonnie13J	10 March 2019
Ethel Smyth	add	WomenArtistUpdates	6 May 2019
Charles-Henri Plantade	create	Voceditenore	1 Dec 2019
Wage Rudolf Supratman	give infobox	Urang Kamang	9 Dec 2019
Johann Strauss II	add	Makkkkus	25 Jan 2020
Jörg Widmann	try	Gerda Arendt	6 Feb 2020
Malcolm Williamson	add	Willwal1	17 Mar 2020
Judith Weir	add	Willwal1	17 Mar 2020
Elena Kats-Chernin	add	Maryphillips1952	23 Sep 2020
Amy Beach	created	Maryphillips1952	24 Sep 2020
Kaikhosru Shapurji Sorabji	per PR comments	Toccata quarta	23 Nov 2020
Friedrich Cerha	add	GrayMitchell	14 Dec 2020
Isang Yun	add	IP	26 Dec 2020
Carl Friedrich Christian Fasch	add	Marino108LFS	24 Jan 2021
George Enescu	add	RAMSES$44932	14 Apr 2021
Paul Hindemith	add	Gerda Arendt	20 May 2021
Nadia Boulanger	add	Evanszoe	21 Jun 2021
Franz Liszt	add	Chariotsacha	18 Jul 2021
Henryk Wieniawski	add	JeffreyViolin	31 Jul 2021
Johann Christoph Bach	add	Kev Ntseeg	27 Aug 2021
Tōru Takemitsu	add	Eiga-Kevin2	13 Nov 2021
Jean Sibelius	try	Gerda Arendt	8 Dec 2021	disc
Mieczysław Weinberg	add	Bgrus22	8 Dec 2021
Ernst Krenek	add	Moshtrofontz	20 Jan 2022
Gian Francesco Malipiero	add	Valentinejoesmith	27 Jan 2022
Darius Milhaud	add	Valentinejoesmith	27 Jan 2022
Betsy Jolas	add	Shedjenna	22 Mar 2022
György Kurtág	add	Mandtplatt	22 Feb 2022
Karol Szymanowski	add	IP	4 Apr 2022
Heitor Villa-Lobos	add	Thi	22 Jun 2022
Artemy Vedel	add	Gerda Arendt	9 Sep 2022
Boris Blacher	add	Toadboy123	26 Sep 2022
Mátyás Seiber	add	IP	28 Sep 2022	there was a short-lived one in 2018
Anton Webern	add	MONTENSEM	7 Oct 2022
Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky	RfC consensus	Shibbolethink	5 Jan 2023	RfC
Carl Maria von Weber	add	Mabcmiller	15 Jan 2023
Sergei Prokofiev	add	Pearman2	16 Feb 2023
Johannes Brahms	finally	Nikolai Gennadievich Nazarov	24 Feb 2023
Alban Berg	add	Engineerchange	26 Feb 2023
Zoltán Kodály	add	Dseay2	3 Mar 2023
Igor Stravinsky	add	MyCatIsAChonk	9 Mar 2023
Carl Nielsen	add	Silence of Järvenpää	29 Mar 2023	disc
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart	RfC consensus	Shibbolethink	30 Mar 2023	RfC
Giacomo Puccini	no objection	UndercoverClassicist	3 Jun 2023
Clarence Barlow	add	IP	29 Jun 2023
Revaz Lagidze	create	LeontinaVarlamonva	3 Jul 2023
Dmitri Shostakovich	add	EthanCheung19	5 Jul 2023
Samuel Barber	add	Gerda Arendt	23 Jul 2023
Siegfried Thiele	add	Jaiquiero	30 Jul 2023
Richard Wagner	RfC consensus	PackMecEng	5 Aug 2023	RfC
Serge Koussevitzky	add	Dronebogus	1 Aug 2023
Alfred Schnittke	restore	CurryTime7-24	10 Aug 2023
Felix Mendelssohn	RfC consensus	PackMecEng	11 Aug 2023	RfC
Luigi Cherubini	add	Dimboukas	7 Nov 2023
Antonio Vivaldi	RfC consensus	Nemov	8 Jan 2024	RfC
Tomaso Albinoni	add	Rafaelmanman	4 Apr 2024
Anton Bruckner	try	Intforce	23 May 2024
Antonín Dvořák	try	Iadmc	20 Jun 2024
Franz Schubert	add	Zingarese	20 Jul 2024
Rodolfo Halffter	add	MONTENSEM	21 Sep 2024
Leif Segerstam	add	DoubleGrazing	9 Oct 2024
Stanisław Moniuszko	add	PavKls	13 Oct 2024

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:59, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

last update: --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:26, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

The task of improving Bach's chorale cantatas, turning 300, reaches it peak with the Christmas season, when he composed them almost daily. Here are the cantatas, their dates of first performance, the article status at the beginning of 2024, - and you can see what you can do, expanding: reviewing for GA, placing in OTD, reviewing for DYK.

Article name	performed	status	expand	GAN	GA review	GA	OTD	DYKN	DYK review	DYK prep
Nun komm, der Heiden Heiland, BWV 62	3 Dec		Y	Y			-	-
Gelobet seist du, Jesu Christ, BWV 91	25 Dec		Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	-
Christum wir sollen loben schon, BWV 121	26 Dec		Y	Y	Y	Y	-	Y	Y	Y
Ich freue mich in dir, BWV 133	27 Dec		Y	Y			-	-
Das neugeborne Kindelein, BWV 122	31 Dec						-	-
Jesu, nun sei gepreiset, BWV 41	1 Jan		Y	Y	Y	Y	-	Y
Liebster Immanuel, Herzog der Frommen, BWV 123	6 Jan						-	-
Herr, wenn die stolzen Feinde schnauben, BWV 248 VI	6 Jan						-	+

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC)