Wikinews:Water cooler/proposals/archives/2015/March

This is an archive of past discussions from Wikinews:Water cooler/proposals/archives/2015. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current page.

Inspire Campaign: Improving diversity, improving content

This March, we’re organizing an Inspire Campaign to encourage and support new ideas for improving gender diversity on Wikimedia projects. Less than 20% of Wikimedia contributors are women, and many important topics are still missing in our content. We invite all Wikimedians to participate. If you have an idea that could help address this problem, please get involved today! The campaign runs until March 31.

All proposals are welcome - research projects, technical solutions, community organizing and outreach initiatives, or something completely new! Funding is available from the Wikimedia Foundation for projects that need financial support. Constructive, positive feedback on ideas is appreciated, and collaboration is encouraged - your skills and experience may help bring someone else’s project to life. Join us at the Inspire Campaign and help this project better represent the world’s knowledge! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice on not-ready review template

First-time contributors are sometimes frustrated because a first review uncovers a set of basic problems, and then once those problems are addressed a second review moves further along the review process and detects a whole new set of problems.

I'm wondering if we should tweak {{peer reviewed/Failed}} so if any of the five criteria are unassessed, above the general comments section of the template is a message something like

Some criteria are not assessed in this review; they may have problems even though they aren't mentioned here.

Anyone have thoughts on how this should be phrased, or whether it's a good idea to say anything like it at all? It wouldn't be difficult to list which criteria were unassessed, if we wanted to do that. --Pi zero (talk) 23:33, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It already reads "Not reviewed. Please address other issues." If we wish, we can modify that to something deemed clearer; saying it twice is just bloat. We throw so much material at newcomers as it is without repeating ourselves. BRS ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 01:14, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken.

The current item is deemphasized with a small icon and grey text in order to make the items actually assessed stand out, and I recall tweaking the template to heighten that effect. --Pi zero (talk) 01:40, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]