This article could benefit from some data still ... who are the most prolific DYK writers, who has worked longest to advance DYK, who is instrumental to the process, more about the people involved, the numbers, how it/they benefit Wiki. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure how you want to integrate this in but here's the list of the most prolific contributors (at least those that choose to list themself). Note that the list is broken into 2 parts: the first half is participations which includes nominations and creations/expansion and the second half is creations/expansions. There are no head/lead of the promoters/admins, it's completely a group effort. The group of admins who promote is large to deal with all of the hours of the day/week. Any admin who finds out that DYK needs to be updated can do the update, although some do more promotions than others. You found the history about the first DYK article. DYK benefits the wiki by encouraging contributors to start new articles or to greatly expand existing stubs. Royalbroil 03:48, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What you added is good; it's OK to highlight outstanding contributors on these Dispatches, so feel free to expand. Why is the archived story red-linked? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:40, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I didn't know what to link to. I think it happened about a month ago. I searched the archives and found [article]. It's a small note at the bottom, so I removed the link in the article. Royalbroil 05:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Goodness !! With this level of excellence in copyediting, people are going to be intimidated from submitting future Dispatches because the standard is set so high :-))) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:36, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]