User talk:SandyGeorgia/2023 Infobox discussions

Latest comment: 8 months ago by SandyGeorgia in topic Methodology

Infoboxes, in bio pages

edit

TBH, I never felt uncomfortable participationg at infobox discussions on bio pages. Just about everyone knows why I 'support' or 'oppose' the addition of an infobox & so nobody has given me much hassle. Also, I do my best not to convince others to agree with me. I'm neither pro-infobox or anti-infobox. GoodDay (talk) 21:07, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I noticed :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:18, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Methodology

edit
  1. Before starting, I looked up main contributors for each of the 17 discussions via the FAC, the article history, and article talk history, and noted those on a summary spreadsheet.
  2. Before starting spreadsheet, examined each RFC and threads before for who initiated the RFC (not always apparent)
  3. I pulled up talk page stats, eg Georges Feydeau.
  4. I noted top talk page contributors.
  5. I copy-pasted all talk page editors to an Excel spreadsheet.
  6. I sorted by date (both first and last entry), then removed all editors who had a talk page entry only before or after the (rough) RFC dates (noting pre-RFC disussions) -- that is, I removed all editors who had no input on infobox RFC.
  7. I sorted by name those editors left
  8. I printed a hard copy of those editors, sorted alphabetically, from the spreadsheet.
  9. I pulled up the RFC page, put it in front of my husband, and had him read back to me whether each editor on my list was an oppose, support or neutral, and noted that on my pre-printed alphabetical editor list.
  10. I tallied those to a summary spreadsheet by editor

Hence, unless a disruptive diff specifically came to my attention via other discussion or having to examine the page other than tallying, I would not be aware of it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:02, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply