Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Article Rescue Squadron/Examples

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconArticle Rescue Squadron
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of the Article Rescue Squadron WikiProject, a collaborative effort to rescue items from deletion when they can be improved through regular editing. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can help improve Wikipedia articles considered by others to be based upon notable topics.

Hello Fosnez. The listing at Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron/Examples is becoming more useful as further examples are added. The only item whose entry I think could be improved is the one for Exercise Robin Sage. I know nothing about this article, but observe that Prime Example of an article that should never have been put through an AfD is not a neutral comment. (There is no rule calling for neutrality; this one just stands out from the rest, since everything else on that page is neutral). Is it possible that the Robin Sage comment could be replaced with a line that is merely informative? EdJohnston (talk) 16:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, I have updated the comment to put a little more context. Feel free to edit it how you please :-) Fosnez (talk) 01:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your reply. I think the entry looks better now. Regarding the table as a whole, I see that some items are included there which never had the {{rescue}} template put on them, for example the first two in the list: Action Medical Research and Aldermaston Soke. Was that your intention? EdJohnston (talk) 14:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]
To clarify, this is not a complaint! I just wondered if guidance might be given as to the sorts of new issues that qualify for adding to the list. I rescue a few things here and there that seem headed for a bad end but don't usually make a list. What types of case should people be watching out for, for future list additions? EdJohnston (talk) 14:55, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I actually only discovered that some of the items on that list had never had the rescue tag used on them when I went to add the tagger. I think as we add more items to the list that have been tagged, we should start removing the ones without tag usage. The mainreason why I wouldn't want to remove them just yet is it would looke even more-so that I am the only one using the tag, which i know is not the case, but because other people havn't been adding their items to the list I can't find out what they were. Be bold, add what you want to the list and we can discuss it further :-) - Fosnez (talk) 20:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully disagree but I think I have a solution that may work for all. Firstly rescuing articles isn't a new concept simply one that we've formalized; many articles have been rescued prior to this project's existence. OK, so now a potential solution. I hope to convert the table to a sortable one and a column can be devoted, as in now done, to those who tagged, for ones prior to ARS or weren't tagged we simply put "n/a" (not applicable). In this way we acknowledge the work we've done as well as the spirit of rescuing which is what we hope to foster. Banjeboi 20:13, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice layout[edit]

Nice layout, I am impressed. Inclusionist (talk) 21:22, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Convert to sortable table proposal[edit]

I'm looking to convert this to a sortable table, if anyone is opposed to this please let me know so we can discuss what might work best. Banjeboi 09:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rescues that may be good candidates to be added to the rescue list[edit]

August 2008[edit]

September 2008[edit]

October 2008[edit]

November 2008[edit]

December 2008[edit]

January 2009[edit]

February 2009[edit]

March 2009[edit]

April 2009[edit]

  1. ^ http://www.aha.org/aha/resource-center/links/aha.html
  2. ^ (link removed)
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference NYT1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).