User talk:BeanieFan11/Sports Cleanup Contest format

Discussion on this contest

@Cbl62, Hey man im josh, Alvaldi, JTtheOG, StickeyWicket, KatoKungLee, Levivich, S Marshall, Thebiguglyalien, Yankees10, PCN02WPS, Muboshgu, and Gonzo fan2007: Pinging some editors on both sides of the notability spectrum who came to mind to see your thoughts on this contest - so, basically, this is an attempt at an alternative to mass draftification proposals such as WP:LUGSTUBS / WP:LUGSTUBS2, which (in my opinion) only result on the ultimate deletion of many notable articles for being poor quality. As you've probably seen, I don't like those proposals and believe trying to improve the articles is a much better option. This is why I thought of the "Global Sports Cleanup Contest" - this is planned as a two-month backlog drive (that could be repeated every few months) to improve stub articles and those currently failing WP:SPORTCRIT (including all articles, not limited to Lugnuts), as well as nominating for deletion articles which are non-notable. As an attempt to motivate users to join, I've set out a large system of awards that can be given out (and still have a few more in mind, this whole thing is still in the construction stages) - if this is widely advertised (maybe some of those bot talk page messages and watchlist notices), I expect it will get a large participation (had I not been involved, I would have certainly been interested by the large amount of shiny things - plus the Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League/Football biography cleanup page - which has no awards - has been successful) and will result in many more articles being improved / dealt with than the draftification proposals and in a less controversial and more enjoyable way. Thoughts on whether you'd join, how the page looks, any suggestions, etc.? BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:07, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote my thoughts here, presumably while you were writing this. But to clarify, I think this is a good idea and I would participate. My position is that deletion or merging of a stub doesn't do real harm, but improvement of a stub does bring benefit. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:13, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Thebiguglyalien: Thanks, I just noticed your attempts to revive the stub improvement project - do you think this contest should take place under the project's auspices, as BilledMammal suggested? BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:50, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm open to WikiProject Stub improvement going in pretty much any direction right now. I just want to see some sort of momentum with it. At the minimum, it might be helpful to encourage participants of the contest to list items at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub improvement/Showcase. It would give that short-term "reward", and it would help establish de-stubbing as something that goes beyond events like this. Though with that said, I am wary of the project being dominated by one subject matter (such as sports). I'd also want to be sure that editors interested in other subject matters were getting involved with it at the same time separately from this contest. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:12, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BeanieFan11, I have two questions about how this might play out. First, is there a plan for how the points are to be tracked? Because from what the coordinators at GA drives have said, even tracking one system of points is a huge pain. This event looks like it's going to have two dozen different types of points for different types of categories and sports that are then added together. Whose job will it be to check every single entry (of which there will hopefully be hundreds if not thousands) to see which sport(s) apply and whether it's BLP, referencing, stub expansion, and/or deletion nomination? I worry that this point system might be much more difficult to maintain than it looks. Second, a simpler question, is there a goal for when this will start (e.g. is November/December the plan)? I ask because if I'm doing anything with WP:WikiProject Stub sorting, I'd like to organize it around this so they're not happening at the same time. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:55, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Thebiguglyalien: You know, I'm starting to realize how unrealistic my initial idea for points tracking (everybody lists their submissions and two judges check everything) is becoming - I agree we'll need to figure something out for that. The best thing I can think of is maybe having User:LivingBot check everything (like is done for the WikiCup), add a running points total and list the entires on a page where the judges will approve or decline them - @BilledMammal: also might have some ideas; he seems good with tools relating to these things. Also, as for when it will run, my plan currently is for November/December, and then if it is successful we could re-run it in later months or do similar events in other topic-areas. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:25, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth: (as WikiCup directors) as well as @Hey man im josh, DreamRimmer, and Illusion Flame: (as NPP backlog coordinators - which uses a similar bot) - do any of you have ideas for how either LivingBot or TolBot (or, any bot, actually) could help keep track of points here? Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:33, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Great work once again. It definitely would not hurt, and I agree that it has the potential to attract a good number of participants. You can count me in, of course. Just one question: are the participants tasked with calculating the points or is there some automatic count of that? JTtheOG (talk) 17:40, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the Lugstub Barnstar would be great. JTtheOG (talk) 17:42, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JTtheOG: The contest is still in the development stages, so I haven't set out how the points would be tracked yet - if a bot could do it automatically, like the WikiCup, that'd be nice, though I'm not sure it'd be able to do it - my initial idea was that users would list their submissions and the judges (probably me and maybe someone else willing to lead it) would assign the points - but everything's still under construction and not set in stone. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:50, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You need a laser focus on the biographies of living people.—S Marshall T/C 18:35, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @S Marshall: I've currently got in the bonus points section a 1.5x bonus for BLPs (4x if they were previously unsourced), do you think it should be higher, and if so, how much? BeanieFan11 (talk)
  - I think that in the first round, only BLPs should attract a reward.—S Marshall T/C 18:59, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - At the moment, I haven't exactly planned rounds - its currently more of just a "highest score in this span wins"-type of contest (plus if we limit it to BLPs that might discourage some of the users who like focusing on historical articles) - though I did just think of an idea in that The BLP Barnstar could be one of the awards. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:10, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BeanieFan11:. Thanks for the ping. It is something very similar to what I am doing with Hampshire cricketers, so far I've expanded 264 players – most of whom were stubs that would likely have been culled under the new guidelines. Though of course mine isn't a contest! A few years ago I created a contest page for the Cricket Project, but thus far there have been no takers :( I'd love for your proposal to get some legs and become a reality! StickyWicket aka AA (talk) 09:03, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would be more than happy to participate. I've already participated in the Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League/Football biography cleanup and couple of similar ones with NBA players which all have been beneficial for the project. Alvaldi (talk) 10:31, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BilledMammal: Do you think you could work on some of the other lists for the non-Lugnuts categories soon? Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:11, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Might I suggest this instead? The current image looks more bronze than gold. You can keep the other one if you want though, I don't mind. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 01:14, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That looks better; swapped. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:24, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Contest revisited

@Habst, WikiOriginal-9, Geschichte, Ingratis, The Knowledge Pirate, MediaKyle, Thryduulf, WhatamIdoing, Gonzo fan2007, JTtheOG, Cbl62, JoelleJay, and Thebiguglyalien: (pinging some editors who I've seen active in either sports or sports stub discussions - some new, some from earlier contest discussion): Alright, it's been a year and a half since I first came up with this, and I'm hoping that now this can finally happen for real, for next June and July. I've redone the rules a little bit: this will be a two-month contest dedicated to improving stub sports biography articles, with barnstars etc. given for all those who score different amounts of points. Points can be earned from either (i) adding SIGCOV to articles missing it, or (ii) from expanding stub sports bios, with their being bonuses for some articles, such as those created by Lugnuts, etc. There were previous concerns about how points will be tracked: I've decided that the participants, on their submissions page (similar to how its done for the WikiCup), will list what categories their submission qualifies for (examples here), and then the judges will verify that and add the points totals to a WikiCup-style leaderboard. I'm hoping for there to be three or four judges, with myself being one. What are all your thoughts on if the scoring system / rules seem reasonable and if you think there should be any changes, etc.? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:51, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Based on prior experience with contests, my #1 suggestion is: Automate as much of the work as you possibly can. See https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/Wikipedia/WikiProject_Medicine_reference_campaign_2023/students/overview for an example of one automated system. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:54, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to express some thoughts, but I clicked on the link I posted above in 2023 and realized I already said it. It shouldn't matter who made the stub per WP:DENY. For something like this, I'd prefer to avoid reference to any specific mass-creator. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 20:02, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Thebiguglyalien: Hmm... I see what you're saying – but I think that having some sort of emphasis on his creations can be beneficial. I think this because he was by far the most prolific creator of sports articles and his are often some of the worst quality, and due to this efforts have been made, as you are aware, to single out his creations to get them mass removed. I.e. the notable stubs he started are at a greater risk of being removed than the average sports stub. I'd also like to get some of the notable draftifed Lugnuts Olympians returned to mainspace, since there's been almost zero progress there. Thoughts? BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:28, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is my first time seeing this, and I am a fan. I don't personally mind the reference to Lugnuts because they aren't a vandal nor a troll seeking attention, so the WP:DENY essay doesn't apply in this instance. If Lugnuts was a troll, I would agree, but that was never alleged. --Habst (talk) 20:25, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not too familiar with the Lugnuts situation but I'm all for getting some of these perpetual one-line people destubbified. Wizardman 00:07, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm 100% in either way, but I agree with WhatamIdoing in the sense that we want to make participating as simple as it possibly can be, and ideally make use of bots. Also, have you seen WikiProject military history contest? I really like the way they set up the table to keep track of the entries.

One thing that's stayed in the back of my mind thinking about contests is the grants. I'm not sure how long it takes to get one, but I think something like this would qualify, and then there could be an actual, physical prize further driving interest in the contest.

I'm also wondering if it might be worth having points for creating a new list from redirected articles? Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't that been a common outcome when there's stubs for say, an entire sports team, none of which are particularly notable in their own right but should still be included? My line of thinking is that it's a given that folks are going to encounter articles that just can't really be expanded, and if we had something like that it would discourage people from either just leaving them as is, or sending them to deletion. As for whether or not to keep the reference to Lugnuts, I say leave it. It's been long enough, and a contest is the most positive possible way of dealing with the Lugstubs. MediaKyle (talk) 11:12, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MediaKyle: I'll have to see if the bot that's used for the WikiCup might be able to assist here... I also tried to come up with a leaderboard, similar to the WP:DCWC competition, which you can see at #Leaderboard, of course it'd need to be changed a bit so its not relying on the Template:DCWC participant. As for the grants, I think this is the application form that would need to be submitted, but I don't feel like giving the WMF my personal information and documents – though if anyone else wants to apply for this there I'd be fine with that. Regarding the redirects, do you mean things like, e.g., redirecting non-notable Czech Olympians to Czech Republic at the 1996 Summer Olympics, or is there something else you're referring to? BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:15, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well we certainly wouldn't want to give out points just for redirecting, my line of thinking was if there were articles like that which haven't yet been created, points could be given for creating them - although maybe that's not really a common scenario, now that I got to looking.

Take this fellow for example, the first person I clicked on in the sportspeople category for my province. Say notability couldn't be established for that article, and 1972 NHL amateur draft or another article to redirect it to didn't already exist, points could be awarded for creating that article. If you think there's already a suitable article available to redirect most or all non-notable sportspeople to, this wouldn't really be applicable. I haven't delved deep enough into the sportspeople stubs yet to be too familiar with them. MediaKyle (talk) 17:34, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking about this more and upon further reflection, points for this would be a terrible idea. I keep forgetting how much emotion there is behind the whole question of sportspeople stubs, and I can already see the arguments over whether some people should've been redirected. I would, however, see a rationale for having some sort of a "What to do when you can't establish notability" section and including this as an option. The scenario that keeps popping into my head is an athlete from somewhere like Japan, where it's difficult for English-speakers to really assess notability, and someone takes it upon themselves to redirect them all and get points for it. It might be worth including some guidance for dealing with foreign language sources as well. MediaKyle (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's really very many potential articles that would meet that criterion (that both need articles and would be good redirect opportunities), so I don't see a need for that (plus mass redirection could cause controversy, as you mentioned). I think some sort of FAQ page could be helpful like you're saying. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:39, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment great work BeanieFan11 on pulling this all together! Heck I would offer up some cold hard cash as a reward for anyone who focuses their efforts on Category:Stub-Class Green Bay Packers articles. Let me think it through, but if you are open to it Beanie, I may create a Packers-specific reward for anyone who gets to a certain number of expanded Packers stubs, and that reward would be a gift card! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:46, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, @Gonzo fan2007:, you could create a Packers reward for the competition if that's what you want. Just let me know what the prize would be and what amount of Packers stubs you'd want done. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:45, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BeanieFan11 The contest has been in my mind for the past couple days, and I have some more thoughts. This contest is, effectively, a response to the whole "sportspeople going to AfD thing". I would think the sportspeople articles most at risk would naturally be any sportsperson who is not from an English-speaking country, in particular sportspeople from such places as Japan, Russia, and maybe some African nations, just as some examples. Going back to the grants, I recall this grant of $2500USD for promoting Nigerian cuisine on WMF projects. I propose a slight focus-shift, to make this the "International Sports Cleanup Contest", with a particular emphasis on expanding articles about sportspeople from countries and areas that receive less attention on English Wikipedia. This doesn't even necessarily have to mean changing the points system as it is now, just a "rebranding" would work. We could apply for a grant, and make use of some of the funds to promote the contest, thereby drawing in foreign language contributors who might be interested in expanding articles about athletes from their home country on Wikipedia, and helping with translations from foreign language sources. Other funds could be earmarked for prizes and such. Thoughts? MediaKyle (talk) 03:19, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MediaKyle: I'd been a little uncertain about trying to get a grant, but today I just noticed the Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The European Destubathon, a contest on destubbing Europe articles with significant prizes. It seems that in three days, nearly 400 articles have already been destubbed, so trying to get a grant may not be a bad idea after all. Maybe the contest should just be reworked to be a "International Sports Destubathon" (perhaps keeping the bonuses, but removing the sigcov points part, which could make keeping score easier) – the only issue that I still have about the grants is that I personally do not want to provide my information in applying for one. Maybe I can talk with the organizers of the Europe contest and see if anyone's willing to apply instead of me for a grant for this... BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:21, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]