Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity/WikiGrail
 | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
| Welcome to the talk page for the WikiGrail competition. Here you can find discussions and noticesfor the WikiGrail. If you would like to discuss, place a notice about, or if you have a request about WikiGrail, please do include it here. |
 | To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, all WikiGrail talk pages redirect here. |
Relaunch
[edit]It would be great to have a contest. It would do wonders for article improvement, and the publicity would certainly increase membership. Some challenges are ensuring a large number of contestants, preventing the contest from becoming monotonous, and minimizing administrative overhead.
I have reviewed some of the more notable contests: WikiCup, Bacon Wikicup and MILHIST Contest. The MILHIST contest is monthly and uses a differential scoring system. The Bacon is an annual contest running 12 months and scoring is based on end-results. The Wikicup, an impressive and prestigious contest, is an annual multi-round tournament which is 10 months long, rounds are 2 months in duration. It is scored on end-results.
As I am adverse to reinventing wheels, and a year is too long, I propose we adopt the Wikicup scoring system and rules, modified for our purposes, and truncate the length of the contest to 4 months. Lastly a catchy name would help greatly in promotion. I nominate WikiGrail.
| Featured article | Good article | Featured list | Featured picture | Featured portal | Featured topic | Good topic | Did you know? | In the news | Good article reviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100 | 30 | 45 | 35 | 35 | 10 per article | 3 per article | 10 | 10 | 2 |
– Lionel (talk) 10:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Scorng
[edit]If possible, I would like to see some points given for editors who work on a monthly collaboration effort to improve and/or clean up articles specifically highlighted in the newsletter. It would probably be up to the judges exactly how many points to award each participant, but it might well be possible to indicate an upper limit to the points that could be earned in such a manner. John Carter (talk) 20:45, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- That is a good idea. I think these kinds of contributions could be awarded "bonus" points--some of the other contests have implemented similar. If it were a collaboration, however, it might be tricky to sort out which editor did what. Let's see what other editors & competitors think. – Lionel (talk) 11:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
- An easy to implement bonus system would be to award points for Top priority articles, since those are the most critical. – Lionel (talk) 03:37, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Toa strikes first blood!!!
[edit]Toa is the first contestant to score points in the 2012 WikiGrail with his GA for Call My Name (Third Day song)! – Lionel (talk) 23:57, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Logo
[edit]Why does this award use the copyrighted logo of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) rather than a free graphic that does not denote any one denomination? (This particular logo file claims Public Domain, yet this graphic is nearly identical and claims copyright. File:Disciples of Christ Chalice 1.svg) Elizium23 (talk) 21:47, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Evaluation of on-wiki writing contests
[edit]Hi everyone. The Program Evaluation and Design team at the Wikimedia Foundation has released a new program evaluation about on-wiki writing contests. Thanks to everyone who shared data, and we hope you'll share with us in the future. You can read the report here:
We hope you'll participate and comment on the talk page, too! SarahStierch (talk) 18:51, 4 January 2014 (UTC)