And I was hoping this would have data in it. :-(
- Well aren't you glad I at least put off deleting it :p --joannac 04:27, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Seriously, I was just about to create something similar, as soon as I'd ironed out the problem currently being discussed on Talk:Virgin Graticule. It looks as if Thomcat has abandoned it, but that's no reason why I can't take it back. I'm going to restore the data and continue. -Robyn 04:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Heh. Precisely the reason I kept it. I thought it would come in useful one day, and I was right?
- I suggest you sort it by latitude, maybe, and put each one in a different section? That way others (i.e. me) can help you compile the list. --joannac 04:37, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- I was hoping to enlist the help of the person who does Maps and Statistics to do something cool with it, and/or integrate the data into one of those maps, so it doesn't end up looking like All Graticules. It most definitely requires sorting, and by latitude is better than by date. -Robyn 04:40, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Well, he's online. Come online and propose it? Or do you want me to do it? --joannac 04:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- I was hoping to enlist the help of the person who does Maps and Statistics to do something cool with it, and/or integrate the data into one of those maps, so it doesn't end up looking like All Graticules. It most definitely requires sorting, and by latitude is better than by date. -Robyn 04:40, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Seriously, I was just about to create something similar, as soon as I'd ironed out the problem currently being discussed on Talk:Virgin Graticule. It looks as if Thomcat has abandoned it, but that's no reason why I can't take it back. I'm going to restore the data and continue. -Robyn 04:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
This looks like a job best done automatically. You actually just need to parse Category:Coordinates reached from the beginning and pick the first one for each graticule. This would also automatically replace the expedition in case an earlier one (ninja or poorly categorized) turns up from the depths of the wiki. Dawidi could probably easily turn it into an external map, while making a wiki list would rather be a job for User:ReletBot or User:AperfectBot. --Ekorren 11:56, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Creating a list of the earliest date in a specific graticule shouldn't be too difficult to create, so long as we are allowed to disregard pages which don't follow the naming standards. The category is sorted lexicographically, so all of the expedition pages should show up in date order, but some sort of checking should still be done to ensure that is the case. I'm of the opinion that alphabetical by graticule name would be a best sorting option, if done by a bot. --aperfectring 12:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Expedition pages that don't follow the naming scheme are very rare (unlike with pictures, where they are much too common), and should be renamed if found. After renaming, the bot will find them. Sorting: Do you mean alphabetically by graticule name or graticule coordinates? I'm not sure what I would prefer, but we seem generally rather to go by coordinates. Although just sorting by latitude and longitude will also result in a funny order, mixing Canada with central Europe. --Ekorren 12:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- My opinion was by actual graticule name, such as Vancouver, British Columbia. If we just go by latitude and longitude, then we might as well make a copy of All Graticules, and cut out any graticule without expeditions. Anyways, for right now, this is putting the cart in front of the horse. It should be discussed later, when someone is actually working on the algo. =P --aperfectring 13:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Expedition pages that don't follow the naming scheme are very rare (unlike with pictures, where they are much too common), and should be renamed if found. After renaming, the bot will find them. Sorting: Do you mean alphabetically by graticule name or graticule coordinates? I'm not sure what I would prefer, but we seem generally rather to go by coordinates. Although just sorting by latitude and longitude will also result in a funny order, mixing Canada with central Europe. --Ekorren 12:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think it would also be interesting to create a "most wanted" list. That list could either be manually maintained (a list of users' personal goals for virgin graticules), or be some sort of algorithm based on the number of successful hashes in adjacent graticules (if a bunch of people are active nearby, why hasn't anyone gone here). --aperfectring 12:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Could be funny, but not of much information value. This would probably rather create a list of "not considered for a reason" graticules. In my case, chance is actually higher that I will hash in Schleswig-Holstein (6 graticules to the north) than southern Switzerland (2 graticules to the south). Would also need to take into account who is really active in the past few months. --Ekorren 12:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- It sounds like this would be better as a manual thing, which was pretty much my leaning anyways. I only brought it up because it seemed like an interesting thing we might want to have. --aperfectring 13:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Could be funny, but not of much information value. This would probably rather create a list of "not considered for a reason" graticules. In my case, chance is actually higher that I will hash in Schleswig-Holstein (6 graticules to the north) than southern Switzerland (2 graticules to the south). Would also need to take into account who is really active in the past few months. --Ekorren 12:52, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- I am against removing someone's badge automatically, but replacing someone from the list would be fine. The act of notifying someone that their badge really wasn't valid is something better handled by the soft warm embraces of a coldhearted computer programmer, rather than the soft warm embraces of a cold hard computer. The bot could perhaps kick out a list of erroneous badges? This would be more challenging to accomplish, however, because not everyone puts their badges on the expedition page, and most people put a full list of their badges somewhere under their user page. I am busy with the planning page list right now, but would be willing to switch over to this, if people come to an agreement that this is more important/worthwhile. I won't lose any of the work I have already done, and in fact some of the work I have already done would apply to this. --aperfectring 12:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks everybody. I think this proves that there is some interest in this and I am glad you seem to be in agreement that the early expeditions with less rigourous proof are still deserving of the VG award.
- It's definitely less important that the current events.
- I agree that automatically parsing Category:Coordinates reached is the way to go. I'd feel obliged to read the expedition reports too. :-)
- To find a list of erroneous badges. Go through Category:Virgin graticule achievement and look for dates that don't match the list. The trouble is that you have to follow the link and see the badge to see what date is on it if it's on a user page. The back of my head had the idea of having the ribbon automatically awarded to the first "coordinates reached" in a graticule.
- The manual work lies in prying the old ninja expeditions from May and June 2008 out of the Expedition Archives.
- I think I'll go with creating an honourable mention "first to prove" ribbon, notifying people they have been sniped by earlier expeditions and that they might want to switch ribbons, and putting the real first expedition on the list.
- I think a graphical presentation would be best. I'm still pondering the alphabetical versus by-latitude versus All-graticules-style for a listing. -Robyn 14:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks everybody. I think this proves that there is some interest in this and I am glad you seem to be in agreement that the early expeditions with less rigourous proof are still deserving of the VG award.
