Academic Kids talk:Most wanted articles

It seems the me that this page should have a list of the most viewed broken links as well. This, to me, would be more closely aligned with the description "Most Wanted Articles". Perhaps this is just a harder thing to determine... Perhaps just a list of broken links that occur on popular pages.

I agree that it would be useful to know how often each broken link has been viewed recently. However, that would probably require some analysis of the webserver and squid logs, which makes it a more complicated issue than just pulling information out of the database. I hope to work on this sometime soon (but not right now).--Wclark 17:39, 2004 Jul 11 (UTC)

Why would anyone view redlinks? Maybe for stubs this is a useful suggestion.--MarSch 15:27, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Contents

1 Most Wanted Articles 2 Making most wanted more useful? 3 Another suggestion 4 Alternate most-wanted list 5 Another suggestion 6 Time for another update? 7 Sort the most wanted articles 8 Sir Bastard the V 9 Questions 10 Articles with names no longer in use 11 Links from templates 12 Duplicate Entries 13 Regional requests 14 New list? 15 Requests

Most Wanted Articles

(from the village pump)

Can someone update Wikipedia:Most Wanted Articles. About half of them are created, now. Anthony DiPierro 01:45, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I have updated it, but you could just go to Special:Wantedpages instead, which is pretty much up to date and contains the same list. Angela. 03:56, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)

If Special:Wantedpages exists, contains the same information, and is more up-to-date, then why not just make Wikipedia:Most Wanted Articles a redirect to it? →Raul654 20:50, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)

Special:Wantedpages contains talk: and user: page links as well, which can be distracting. Radagast 19:15, Mar 10, 2004 (UTC)

Unless Special:Wantedpages is updated live, I think it's preferable to use Wikipedia:Most Wanted Articles, as there is no way to see on Special:Wantedpages which articles were already created. -- User:Docu

I've gone through and updated the list again, removing all those that weren't too stubby. ambivalenthysteria

I just updated the list again. Apparently, we're only six articles away from finishing the Wikipedia. MK 17:23, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Now down to five, and all five left have to do with music. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 17:35, Jul 11, 2004 (UTC)

Not a real update, but I took the top items off Special:Wantedpages, edited out the User page links and similar stuff, and pasted it on the list here. MK 03:33, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Making most wanted more useful?

At the moment, Special:Wantedpages is not updated automatically, but created only once in some days (to help the servers with their burden). That is okay -- but what is confusing is the use of edit links, because they stay red. That is no problem if Wantedpages is generated every time one calls it, but in the current state of affairs, it would be more useful if one actually can see if a wanted page (say: Toto (band), which is still listed on the top of most wanted) has been created by someone else in the meantime. So I propose to introduce another link (to the page, not to editing the page) for every item in the Special:Wantedpages to make it easier to check if the item got created meanwhile. -- till we *) 13:13, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I *STRONLGY* agree with the above - there's no way of telling which ones have been written and which ones haven't. →Raul654 16:42, Mar 7, 2004 (UTC)

I agree with you, the current situation for this (and other special pages) isn't that great. A solution could be to place the content on Wikipedia:Most_Wanted_Articles and edit it there. Special:Wantedpages would just suggest to look there. -- User:Docu

Additionally, the script needs some work, many many of the most wanted pages list ten or more links to the Most_Wanted_ articles page..... this is _not_ useful. I love killing wanted, it's sorta my hobby, but it's getting frustrating. Additionally, the CURRENT version has a just plain wrong wanted as the first one (Deaddead) with over 32K wants... uh No Rick Boatright 05:30, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Ouch! I suspect this of being a dummy value in the scripts that's being interpreted literally for some reason - it's even showing up as the target of a redirect from As of 2000! Perhaps a developer could look into this and find out what's going on (maybe the same bug as the other whatlinkshere problems, or an attempted fix?) - IMSoP 18:57, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Another suggestion

I have another suggestion about generating this list: could we automatically leave off all of the "List of people by name:" entries? They obviously don't exist on purpose, so there's no sense in including them. (Also, while we're at it, could we automatically leave off anything having to do with Pokemon? :-) ) -- Walt Pohl, 15 Mar 2004

I agree. Leaving user pages off the list would also be an improvement. (I would also not mind skipping over the Grammy Awards and Eurovision Song Contest pages) - SimonP 22:42, Mar 17, 2004 (UTC)

The Grammy Awards and Eurovision Song Contest pages are easy to get started (I have a perl script to extract the contestants from each country by year, to make the "Such-and-such Country in the Eurovision Song Contest" pages, if anyone wants it). Most of the necessary information is already in the Wikipedia, it's just a matter of collecting it together.--Wclark 21:27, 2004 Jul 10 (UTC)

Alternate most-wanted list

Folks, I'm playing about with scripts to generate useful summary reports from an offline copy of the database. There's a close analogy of the most-wanted list accessible at User:Topbanana/Reports/mostwanted. The method used to generate the list differs somewhat from the one here, I'm not sure the results are comparable enough to merge, but anyone's welcome to make use of it while I refine the scripts. Comments and ideas welcome also.

Another suggestion

With electoral divisions etc, a country/region is included. Probably some of the people could do with indications of who is intended (eg is Peter Shore the British politician?)

Jackiespeel 17:55, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes, a context for which the item is intended would be nice. I managed to create this myself for a couple, by searching, and found all the pages that linked to it, but fore more common words/names I'm finding a lot of non-linked references. So I don't know what they mean, for instance, by "Abandon". Are those 15 links all refering to Abandonment, and does it simply need a redirect, or is this some TV show or book I've never heard of?

Another example is Frank Lloyd. A wikipedia search brings up Frank Lloyd Wright, so that's out. A google search without "wright" brings up the Frank Lloyd Art Gallery and 7 different IMDB (http://www.imdb) matches, including 3 actors and a director. Which Frank Lloyd is being refered to 15 times?

Some kind of link to those 15 sources would be nice.

lunaverse 02:15, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This can be found without too much difficulty by going to the article page and then going to "what links here." - SimonP 05:57, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)

Time for another update?

Looks like the last time the script ran was July, 11 2004.

lunaverse 02:17, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Sort the most wanted articles

Can someone actually sort the most wanted articles by country or something like that? It's kind of annoying to go through them all. KNewman 13:15, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)

Sir Bastard the V

This isn't a most wanted article and shouldn't be on this page. Perhaps we shouldn't include links from Talk pages when deciding which articles should be on this page. Tempshill 21:27, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Questions

1. What does the (# links) to the side mean?

The number of articles with links to the page of that name. --Oldak Quill 23:49, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

2. Why is there a "105. Kusu Island (41 links)" as well as a "472. Kusu Island (30 links)"? --Jwanders 21:49, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

When the page is updated the top thousand or so requests are added. The number of links required to make this cut has steadily been rising. Those pages that were on the page prior to the update, but which did not make the new cut, are not removed creating the occasional duplicate. - SimonP 22:26, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

3. Are links from templates counted? for each instance of the template? --Rj 21:53, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, for each instance. A decision that makes this page far less useful. - SimonP 22:26, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)

Articles with names no longer in use

Several articles point to titles that are no longer in general use. For example, there are requests for "Minister of Energy", "Minister of Employment and Immigration", and "Minister of Communications" -- all Canadian federal cabinet ministers. Canada changes the names of its federal departments and general titles, such as "Minister of Employment and Immigration", could be confused with cabinet ministers from other countries. How should this be addressed? Note that:

• Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources Canada -- would now be the Minister of Natural Resources Canada
• Minister of Employment and Immigration -- would now be Minister of Human Resources Development Canada or Citizenship & Immigration Canada
• Minister of Communications -- may now be Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, depending on the context

Following the next cabinet shuffle, the government departments could change again. Moreover, Minister of Department XYZ is probably not important enough to warrant a separate reference in an encyclopedia. So "Minister of **XYZ Canada**" should likely be the preferred wikification. However, is there a convention for this? --Westendgirl 08:02, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It is useful to have articles on defunct cabinet positions. For instance I don't know what the responsibilities of the Minister of Communications were, and there is so far nowhere in the Wiki to find out. We do have some articles on other past portfolios such as the Secretary of State for Canada and the Secretary of State for External Affairs. - SimonP 15:55, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

I see your point. I think it would be helpful to put Canada in the title, so that there is no confusion with international titles. For example, the US has United States Secretary of State, but Secretary of State is a general article. --Westendgirl 07:39, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Defunct and current positions should both have articles - they are not identical and these articles are hence useful. On another point, they shouldn't be named "Minister of **XYZ Canada**" as this defies the naming policy and is unclear. Names such as "Minister of **XYZ of Canada**" or "Minister of **XYZ for Canada**" are far more clear and hence useful. --Oldak Quill 15:09, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Links from templates

This is both useless and confusing. For example, Indian hip hop has 58 links because of Template:Worldhiphop so that every world hip-hop article links to it - otherwise it would have maybe 5. - Lev 21:24, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Templates should, ideally, not be counted in this. That may take a major software change, though, and might be impossible. Tuf-Kat 21:57, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

Template or not, that is still 58 pages linking to the page. I have come to realise that most pages on this list are caused by templates (how else do we suddenly have dozens of pages with hundreds of pages linking to them following update). The fact that they are caused by a template is not counter to the purpose of this page. --Oldak Quill 15:04, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

What is the purpose? Statistics? How does the appearance of the link in a template make a page more wanted? Lev 17:15, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

A page is more wanted by virtue of it being linked by more pages. This page is here so that people will create these article which, stastically speaking, more people encounter. --Oldak Quill 16:16, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think these templatelinks are similar to googlebombs and defeat the purpose of this site by listing many well-interconnected redlinks on obscure topics. --MarSch 15:40, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Duplicate Entries

The entry for Julius Sang appears twice in the "General" list, once with "37 links" and once with "25 links". What's going on here? Is there a bug in the report generation process? -- Dominus 12:27, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

When the page is updated the top thousand or so requests are added. The number of links required to make this cut has steadily been rising. Those pages that were on the page prior to the update, but which did not make the new cut, are not removed creating the occasional duplicate. - SimonP 15:12, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Dominus 14:37, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Regional requests

Where information is requested for geographical places, an indication of the country would be useful.

New list?

It's been more than six months since this list was refreshed. Isn't it about due for another? —wwoods 00:11, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There has been some talk about this recently at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#purposeful deadend pages. Gkhan has generated a new list at User:Gkhan/Mostwanted. However of the 1000 articles listed there well less than a hundred are not generated by massive templates somewhat reducing its usefulness. - SimonP 00:27, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Requests

Why did they get deleted? Do you want more information? --Helpinghands 15:33, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)