Puddleglum2.0 is both an active member of the Guild and a regular contributor to "The Signpost".
Ten years ago, the Signpost featured an interview with the then-coordinators of the Guild of Copy Editors to celebrate the completion of their very first copyediting drive. This May marks the tenth anniversary of that drive, so to commemorate that, we interviewed members of the GOCE to see how far the project has progressed. We interviewed two coordinators, Tdslk and Baffle gab1978, the current lead coordinator Jonesey95, and Tenryuu, a member who joined the Guild recently. Also making an appearance is Lfstevens, the only active copy editor left from that very first drive (other editors who participated in that first drive were copy editors for many years before moving on to other focus areas). Here are our questions and their answers.
Can you tell us a bit about what you normally do on Wikipedia besides the GOCE?
Reidgreg: My next most-active area is with WikiProject Canada. I put together a five-hook DYK for Canada Day last year, and help with their 10,000 Challenge.
Tenryuu: Currently, I'm keeping up to date with some aspects of WP:COVID-19 and acting as a host over at the Teahouse.
Lfstevens: I like to work on machine learning, marine science and occasionally take on a big job. In the middle of scrubbing Socialism at the moment.
Jonesey95: I am a hard-core gnome as well as a template editor, making thousands of tiny edits behind the scenes.
Baffle gab1978: I don't do a great deal outside the Guild these days.
Why did you join this Project? Is it a different area than the ones you usually edit in?
Reidgreg: I was rightly called out for close paraphrasing as a new editor, and came to GOCE in 2016 to improve my writing skills. I'd also learned that the primary article I was editing was receiving close to a million views per month, and felt a responsibility to write as clearly as possible. I believe that what I've learned at GOCE applies to every aspect of editing, including how to interact with other editors.
Tenryuu: I was invited a few years back by an editor (whose username I have sadly forgotten) and was happy to join. I also work in other wikis besides those under Wikimedia, though I mostly do copyediting there as well.
Baffle gab1978: Having done some copy-editing back in 2012 I think, I decided making articles easier to read was the best way for me to help improve Wikipedia. For a few months I had a small queue of c/e requests in my user space; this grew quite alarmingly so I stopped doing that and began working from the GOCE's Requests page.
Lfstevens: I wanted a low-stress domain where I could improve my skills as a Wikipedian. And the backlog was pretty awful back in the day.
Jonesey95: I have always enjoyed copy editing, putting a fine polish on a bit of prose so that it is easier to read and understand.
What, in your opinion, is the primary mission of the GOCE?
Reidgreg: "To improve the quality of writing on Wikipedia" – through our own editing, by setting an example, and by providing guidance and hands-on training.
Tenryuu: To make articles say what they mean and mean what they say. As an encyclopedia it's important for Wikipedia to convey the information from sources accurately.
Tdslk: More pragmatically, we mainly edit articles from the backlog of those tagged as needing a copy edit, as well as requests from other editors, usually for articles being nominated for a good article or featured article.
Baffle gab1978: To make Wikipedia articles clearer, more concise and easier to read.
Lfstevens: To make each article better say what it is trying to say, in conformance with WP policies.
What should be or has been focused on more: maintaining the Requests (REQ) page or working on the backlog?
Reidgreg: There's always a question of how our efforts are best spent, and how to find the articles in most need of copy editing. Articles with maintenance tags tend to have more problems, while those requested for copy edit tend to be read more.
Tenryuu: While working on the backlog is important, there's a sense of relative urgency with requests. Most of them usually stop by the Guild as a last stop before being nominated for Good Article or Featured Article status. Work on the backlog is usually asked for in the forms of backlog drives happening every two months.
Tdslk: I'd say it is an even split.
Baffle gab1978: I agree with Tdslk here; I prefer working at REQ but others enjoy working on the backlog, especially during the Drives and Blitzes.
Progress made on the backlog since 2014. The backlog was at 8,323 articles at the start of the first drive in 2010.
Lfstevens: Don't know which is more important in general. Sometimes I feel like REQ an attempt to cut the line. The average article there is in better shape than the larger queue, but they are also in better shape.
Jonesey95: Different copy editors focus on one or the other, typically. We have editors who enjoy the backlog, since it provides a lot of choices and some articles that need a ton of help. Others prefer editing Requests, which tend to be higher-quality articles when they arrive in our queue.
Over ten years of Drives, what period in GOCE history has stood out to you the most? Why?
Reidgreg: Late 2018, from my own personal perspective, as that was my first term as lead coordinator. I felt that I was paying forward the help that I'd received.
Jonesey95: I have been involved in the GOCE for seven years as an editor and a coordinator, and no one period really stands out for me. This, to me, is one of the key attributes of the GOCE: steady, consistent work, chipping away at a big backlog of articles month by month. In our ten years of backlog reduction drives and nearly eight years of week-long blitzes, we have never missed a month. We don't try for heroic bursts of editing to knock out the backlog quickly; unlike effective and efficient gnome or bot work that can be done in sprints, I think that an effort like that applied to copy editing would result in editor burnout and low-quality edits. We have preferred steady quality, even if it takes a while.
Tdslk: Slow and steady is definitely our style. Every other month for ten years we have held a drive, and in the alternate months we have a week-long blitz, usually organized around a theme. If we do get down to zero articles in the backlog, that will be quite a moment.
Lfstevens: Right now things are very exciting as the backlog finally goes down to triple and hopefully double digits. After all this time, I'm ready to zero it out.
Do you think the GOCE is different from other Projects in how it runs and collaborates? If so, how?
Reidgreg: GOCE is a bit unique among WikiProjects: it identifies as a guild, and its article talk page banner denotes a review process. GOCE is similar to WP Peer review or WP Good articles, but with a narrower focus and a maintenance aspect which provides a training ground for new editors. It's a microcosm of the Wikipedia community, with new editors and ten-year veterans, all working toward common goals.
Jonesey95: I can't speak for other projects, but I can tell you what makes us successful. We got to where we are by establishing and maintaining a culture of hard work, collegiality, and relatively drama-free interaction, something that is not true of every place on the internet, or even on Wikipedia. I am proud of our Guild, not for the number of edits, because numbers can be gamed, but for our dedication to quality and teamwork. We are all volunteers here, and we are mostly self-policing, so I am sure that some questionable copy edits slip through, but it has been my experience in checking other copy editors' work that our edits almost always improve article prose substantially, even when they leave behind – or, inevitably, introduce – a few errors. [CC declaration: The above text is adapted from Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Membership/News/2019 Annual Report]
Tenryuu: I'm only an active member in one other WikiProject: COVID-19. The atmosphere is different due to urgency that isn't on here; over there new items pop up almost daily and need to be discussed; because the project is spread out over many, many articles, very often there's link-hopping to discussion on other talk pages which can be disorienting for some people. The GOCE provides a central location for editors to come and submit articles for copy editing. The focus on checking grammar and spelling doesn't demand immediate attention, which gives copy editors time to thoroughly analyse the copy and give quality submissions.
Baffle gab1978: Yes, I think so, though we share similarities with a few others, such as Military History and Cleanup. Most WikiProjects are focussed on particular subject areas while we work across the entire encyclopaedia. We collaborate with a very diverse set of editors with equally diverse interests. We may be presented with an article about a recent Bollywood movie then immediately afterwards one about a tenth-century castle in Slovakia.
Going forward, once the backlog is cleared, do you think the mission of the GOCE will change?
Reidgreg: Our focus in how we go about the mission may change. We've been looking at other methods to find articles in need of copy editing, and at collaborations with other WikiProjects. As implied by the Wikipedia logo with its missing pieces, there will always be more for us to improve.
Jonesey95: There are a lot more articles to be written, which means a lot more copy editing is coming our way. Because this is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, editors have a wide variety of competence, skill, and experience. Our work takes the prose of dedicated contributors whose language skills may not be top-notch and improves those contributions so that knowledge can be delivered to the world in a clear, understandable way. It is no small thing that we do here at Wikipedia. As for a modified mission, the reduction of our backlog to less than one month of articles means that we will be discussing ways to offer our skills to other groups of editors who want to improve subsets of articles, or actively seeking out valuable articles that need copy editing but have not been tagged. [CC declaration: The above text is adapted from Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Membership/News/2019 Annual Report]
Tenryuu: I find it highly unlikely that the backlog will ever be truly cleared. During March's backlog drive there were still articles being added. If it is relatively low in tagged articles then it might be likely that requests will be answered much faster.
Tdslk: During our ten years of drives, the number of articles in the backlog has gone from 8,323 to (at the time I type this) 272. In our more productive drives we have reduced the backlog by over 300 articles, so it is possible that we will actually entirely clear the backlog in May. If we don't make that goal, that's okay. We don't want to rush our work at the expense of quality. But if we do, we are talking about other ways to find articles that need our attention, as the others mention above.
Baffle gab1978: The Requests page is almost always busy, especially at this time when COVID-19 lockdowns are in force in many countries. As of my timestamp, we have 58 requests pending, which will keep us going for a while.
Lfstevens: I hope it will change to become more proactive, reaching out to GA folks and others attempting bigger things of which copy editing is only a part. I also am waiting for more artificial intelligence support, in the hope that it will absorb some of the more mundane copy editing tasks.
What are some challenges the GOCE faces, and, if there are any, how do you address them?
Reidgreg: One of our main challenges is targeting articles which need and are appropriate for copy editing – which is to say that they are notable, stable, and have adequate sourcing. Our coordinators manually vet these as time allows.
Tenryuu: Articles that have preexisting issues like lack of citations and unclear ideas. Most of the time it's a stab in the dark and assumptions have to be made for unclear passages. It's easier with requests as there is an active editor who is able to answer any questions a copyeditor may have.
Tdslk: There can be a misperception that we are, or claim to be, some sort of final authority, when we're actually just a ragtag gang of misfit gnomes trying our humble best to improve things. We do make mistakes, and we welcome (polite) feedback on our work. Likewise, while we might give opinions about style issues, we aren't some sort of Supreme Court that hands out the ultimate answers.
Baffle gab1978: What Reidgreg said! We're frequently asked to copy-edit articles that are unsuitable for copy-editing; they may be undergoing rapid changes or may be a venue for edit-wars and dramah. Some may be very long but have few references, or they may be the subject of a deletion discussion. Often, there's little point working on these articles because the page may be deleted or a full, thoughtful copy-edit can be wiped out with just a few edits or a quick reversion. Articles about rapidly changing or ongoing events such as the current COVID-19 crisis can be particularly difficult to copy-edit. At the Requests page, editors who are concerned about the suitability of an article for copy-edit—usually but not always project coordinators—can raise the problem at the Requests talk page (REQ Talk) and the request is put on hold. We discuss whether the request should be declined or whether the article should receive a copy-edit. This process stops the Requests page from getting bogged down with unattended requests, and helps us focus our energies on articles that are good candidates for a thorough copy-edit and will hopefully see further improvement from others.
Lfstevens: Mostly the same as other WP projects. Limited ability to attract new editors.
What would you say to newer editors wishing to help out?
Reidgreg: Be open-minded. Avoid following the writing style you were taught off-wiki, and think critically about every change you make to an article.
Tenryuu: Before diving straight into copyediting, have a look at what long-time members are doing and have done to copyedit articles. Better yet, keep an eye on articles that have made GA or FA status and see what changes copyeditors have done. Take your time: rushing an edit does not help anyone. I strongly recommend doing more than one pass when copyediting; sometimes I discover something I missed during my first pass that I catch in subsequent revisions. Do not hesitate to ask the coordinators or other experienced members if you would like to have your edits checked.
Baffle gab1978: Come and see what we do. Look around the Guild, read through some of our extensive talk pages and get an idea of the project's culture and procedures. If you've never copy-edited a Wikipedia article, have a look at our basic guide to copy-editing and start with a short article from the backlog. We don't just fix typos and grammatical errors; we remove any padding or waffle, simplify over-complicated text, and make the article clearer, more concise and direct for the reader. We're very approachable; you can always ask us for a review of your work—but do expect an honest answer! As you gain experience with copy-editing, you'll see how further improvements can be made to most Wikipedia articles. Most of all, realise every edit we make must help the reader to understand the subject of the article.
Lfstevens: Jump right in. We will welcome you, answer your questions and defend good faith work.
Tdslk: A good place to start is with the tagged articles in the backlog. Gaining experience there will help when working on articles from the Requests page.
Discuss this story