Judges talk:Contest

Deliberations, elections, and other "judicial" business shall take place here.--TerryH^Talk 13:37, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Status
Judges, Active:3
Majority:2

Archives:1

Roll call

First order of business: the calling of a roll. All judges should come to this page and watch it. Please leave your signature.--TerryH^Talk 13:38, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Present Geo.Complain! 14:57, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Here Ĥøĵĭmåçħôńğ^talk 17:34, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Rules

We only have 6.5 hours before the contest starts, and as judges, I think we are responsible for coming up with some rules, such as what constitutes a "quality" article or "quality" edit. My proposals follow:

• A "quality article" includes at least two full-length paragraph, three relevant citations, and more in-depth content than just a stub. In the case of a dispute, the inclusion/lack of an image can be used as a deciding factor.
• A "quality edit" to an existing article includes at least two extra sentences, an additional reference, and the inclusion of an important or relevant fact.

Feel free to revise as you see fit, this shouldn't be all that hard. --Ĥøĵĭmåçħôńğ^talk 17:33, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Hoji, I like your criteria. But to this I would like to add:

1. One point of extra credit for having more than, say, six relevant citations.
2. One point of extra credit for enclosing the citations in ref tags and including the references tag to define a reference section.
3. Two points of extra credit for submitting an article well-organized into sections.
4. One point of extra credit for breaking an existing article into logical sections if it didn't already have any.
5. A new article should be eligible for all forms of credit that can attach to an article--thus, submitting a quality new page with categorization should rate eleven points--ten for the article and one for the cat tag.--TerryH^Talk 23:02, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Good Idea Geo.Complain! 03:00, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

I like your ideas, Terry. Shall we forward these proposals to Andy, or do we not need his approval? --Ĥøĵĭmåçħôńğ^talk 12:25, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

We're the judges, and Andy has in fact joined one of the teams. Therefore, what we say--or rather, how we rule--goes.--TerryH^Talk 12:33, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

Needed: rulings and publication

Gentlemen, we need to rule on a question of blocking credit: If someone unblocks and then reblocks a user account, then shall that person's team get the two points for applying the block? If so, then shall we require a decent interval to pass between the unblock and the reblock? I suggest twenty-four hours.

Also: we've come up with some suggestions that we all seem to agree are excellent. These qualify as rulings, and I move that we publish them to the contest page right away so that both teams know exactly how we're going to score their articles, edits, and blocks.--TerryH^Talk 07:24, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

Support 24 hour ruleGeo.Complain! 16:59, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

When a user unblocks and reblocks an account, credit may only be granted if not less than 24 hours has passed between the two events.

Codified, move to publish Geo.Complain! 17:10, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

Someone codify everything else and archive the discussions. Geo.Complain! 17:10, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

Team 1 Substitution

From the chatter that I watch continually, I now learn that Conservative wants to quit Team 1, and that DeborahB. wants to join the team.

Andrew has assented to this, even though, as he says, the substitution "will make Team 1 even harder to beat." The brutal fact is that Conservative was little more than dead weight. As of 9:30 a.m. EDT today, he had contributed nothing to the effort of that team--I was trying to run my own tally at the time. And as of right now, he has done only the most minor edit to an article that he had already created: Hamilton Square Baptist Church riot.

I'm ready to consider the substitution effective immediately, and retroactive to the start of the contest. And I further move that we all look at Conservative's contributions to that article beyond 12:01 am EDT July 10 to see whether they merit the two points that a small edit normally earns.--TerryH^Talk 14:43, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

Second motion Geo.Complain! 16:57, 10 July 2007 (EDT)

Conservative

On the issue of Hamilton Square edits made by Conservative, how do you vote?

Grant The edits appear to merit two points. Geo.Complain! 17:13, 10 July 2007 (EDT)