Talk:Archive:New Draft of the Week

Front page or no?

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

Rules

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

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

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

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

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

Interested in New Article of the Week

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

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