Content deleted Content added
→GA history: new section |
re |
||
Line 47:
Hi -- not sure if you're planning to go back to the code you wrote to piece together GA history, but I ran into another oddity that is likely to cause problems if you do. See [[Talk:Staffa]]; I hadn't realized there were old GA reviews that were simply sections on a talk page. In that case there's articlehistory, but that probably won't always be the case. And it also occurs to me that a few GAs have been deleted, which will also screw things up -- though I would guess most have left redirects behind so that would make them traceable at least. I am starting to think the task may be impossible. [[User:Mike Christie|Mike Christie]] ([[User_talk:Mike Christie|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Mike_Christie|contribs]] - [[User:Mike Christie/Reference library|library]]) 02:54, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
:{{yo|Mike Christie}} Yes, it's on the back burner behind school and WP obligations than I really shouldn't have taken on. Thank you for the link. The article is still categorized as a good article, so presumably we could go through discrepancies between the category, and the set of review pages, by hand, and just once. Talk-page-section reviews which ended in a fail, and which no one categorized, would fall through ... but meh, I doubt those are common. [[User:Ovinus|Ovinus]] ([[User talk:Ovinus#top|talk]]) 04:46, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
| |||