Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Membership/News/2019 Annual Report

Statistics

FYI, I'm going to start crunching numbers today. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:16, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Reidgreg; feel free to correct any stats I've already added if needed. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 02:17, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

I've finished adding data. For a brief explanation of some of my changes:

• Not everyone lists requests or old articles on blitzes (it isn't required and there's no bonus). So I took a list of articles from each blitz and compared them against the requests archives to find the requests for each blitz.
• I similarly obtained the number of old articles from blitzes (for February, August and December, the only blitzes which had an "old" month instead of a theme), by subtracting the requests for the blitz from the blitz totals.
• I compared the blitz and drive articles against the requests page to get the number of requests not done on a blitz or drive, in order to obtain the total number of articles for the annual leaderboard (I only did this for the most prolific copy editors who stood to rank on the leaderboard).
• I tried to give a half-point for requests completed by multiple editors, but may have subtracted a full point when removing the overlap between blitzes/drives and requests. It'd be a pretty small error.

I think that's it. Give me a ping if something looks weird. I'll try to write up something for the lead. – Reidgreg (talk) 17:53, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

I wrote a little bit for the lead. I think the content is there, except for maybe the last section. Can work on copy editing it for consistency and fiddling with the charts and graphs. – Reidgreg (talk) 21:44, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for completing the stats, they've never been my favourite thing so much appreciated. I'm happy with the report now so unless anyone want to add anything else so I guess we're just waiting for Jonesey95's text now. Topsheet is here. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 03:52, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I just noticed the following in the Requests page section (bolded for emphasis):

607 requests were completed in 2019 compared to 625 in 2019, 668 in 2018, 571 in 2017, 665 in 2016, 537 in 2015 and 486 in 2014.
589 requests were received in 2019, compared to 616 in 2019, 690 in 2018, 588 in 2017, 690 in 2016, 543 in 2015 and 489 in 2014.

I arrived at the 2019 figures of 625 completed and 616 received by pasting the 2019 archive (as it was then) and part of the 2018 one into a spreadsheet, taking account of the remaining requests at REQ and noting the number of entries in the sheet. Did I miscalculate these numbers? If so, the percentages noted in the opening paragraph probably need correcting too. I'm sorry for the errors. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:45, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

I just checked again; there are 616 entries in the 2019 archive (all requests received in 2019); of these 18 were processed in 2020 so removing them leaves 598. From 2018, 36 were processed in 2019; 598+36=634. So I was inaccurate with my 625 processed figure! And I now see where 607 came from; 634-27 withdrawn or declined=607 but I can't come to 589 from the 2019 archive page. Please pass me the dunce's hat; I'll be standing over ----> there in the corner! :D Cheers, Baffle☿gab 12:36, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

@Baffle gab1978: Thanks for catching that. You're right, I checked again and confirm that it should be 616 submissions in 2019 and 607 completed in 2019. I believe that I incorrectly removed 27 declined/withdrawn from 616 to arrive at 589, which was the wrong figure for that. (I'll take the dunce's hat for myself.) Consequently, the number of 2019 submissions was 89.27% of that from 2018, rather than 85.36%. I've corrected that (rounding to 11% fewer submissions). – Reidgreg (talk) 18:33, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for compiling this report! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:52, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

• +1 to the above! Great job and thank you! Puddleglum ^2.0 01:14, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Great job on the newsletter

I like the idea of finding a new mission. Possibly establish relationships with other projects and collaborate? (India might accept help on its village articles. There are a lot of Indian villages.) A few drives to go, though. Lfstevens (talk) 00:22, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

If you have ideas, let's discuss them at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:48, 8 February 2020 (UTC)