User talk:JogiAsad
| ←User page | Welcome to my talk page | Archives (current)→ |
Issues with Wikigap Pakistan 2020 Results[edit]
I want to highlight a few things regarding Wikigap Pakistan 2020 results. First of all, I respect the decision taken by jury and judges but as a regular participant of Wikipedia Challenges and a Judge in “Wiki Loves South Asian Women”, I want to add my two cents.
| User | Articles | Points | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| Umeedawan | 59 | 3372 | 5 |
| Sianf(سیانف) | 81 | 3025 | 2 |
| Hania Tarik | 52 | 2390 | 1 |
| Mr. Afzal | 77 | 2603 | 4 |
| Obaid Raza | 27 | 875 | 6 |
| Suneel Malik | 9 | 650 | 3 |
User Suneel Malik with just 9 articles and 650 points stands at 3rd position and a user with 59 articles and 3372 points at position 5. Kindly, explain the criteria for such positioning. I have alead of around 1000 points over Hania Tarik and 400 over Sianf and 2700 over Suneel Malik in points.
As a data analyst, I have taken a whole day after to compile relevant data of participants and sharing it with you to analyze and compare with your data.
Wikigap Pakistan 2020 User Article Data Analysis
According to the ruleset for the competition, articles would be judged by adding bytes , references, new pages , categories, images and adding to projects to make Wikipedia data more meaningful and rich for analysis.
10+ articles of mine have more than 50 references including 5 articles with 78+ articles. I have 5articles securing around 150 points. 3 of my articles are not reviewed correctly otherwise I have one article that touched 200 points as well. I have covered the longest and lengthiest articles in the competition (5 articles with 40K plus bytes).
I would like to request to review my articles and points before finalizing the results. I am ready to provide more data and stats to support my claim.
- All articles were reviewed and points were calculated precisely within the available time duration of the challenge articles review. you can contact further Khilari & Historian. Thanks JogiAsad (talk) 14:09, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Articles to Review again[edit]
Following 3 articles are not reviewed correctly (I made a mistake and it was overlooked as well).
ur:نرگس فخری Points: 46688 bytes=46; references(102)=102; new categories(71)=35.5; Wikiproject(1)=0.5 - Total: 184;
ur:حدیقہ کیانی (Correct Review should be Points: 48873 new bytes=48; new references(102)=; new categories(99)=49.5;
Wikiproject(1)=0.5 - Total 200;)
ur:صبا قمر (Correct Review should be Points: 46972 new bytes=46; new references(83)=83; new categories(81)=40.5;
Wikiproject(1)=0.5 - Total: 170;)
- All articles were reviewed and points were calculated precisely within the available time duration of the challenge articles review. you can contact further Khilari & Historian. Thanks JogiAsad (talk) 14:09, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Guidance of Fountain tool[edit]
Dear organizers,
Here is a guidance of Fountain tool. If you are wondering how to create an editathon on fountain or want to check the editathon be created or not before WAM start, please feel free to have a look.
Looking forward to meeting you online soon.
WAM International team 2020.10
(ur:مایا علی) Article points not calculated correctly[edit]
Article points were not reviewed correctly.
ur:مایا علی Points: 22800 new bytes=22; references(58)=58; New Categories(28)=14; Wikiproject(1)=0.5 - Total: 94.5; Reviewed: 22+58+14+0.5=40.5 (06.12.20)
Mistake in total points while reviewing 22+58+14+0.5=94.5 should be total points