Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vancouver/Archive/October 2006
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
started
Well, there's the start. Two important notes:
- the red-linked Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Vancouver articles by quality statistics on the project page is normal. It should be updated by the bot at 0300 UTC after which it will be a nice little assessment infobox.
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Vancouver/Assessment#Importance scale needs to be updated. I deliberately left the Organized Labour text in the scale as an example - but I don't spend enough time at this project to be well qualified for writing new criteria. This should be done soon, so people know how to rate articles.
I've tagged a handful of articles to make sure things are working, and I'll check in over the next few days. --Bookandcoffee 22:08, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Portal
I was thinking that we should do a Vancouver portal. What do you guys think? -- Selmo (talk) 21:40, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Historical Photos
As far as I can tell, images are considered public domain if they were taken prior to 1923 (US) or are older than 50 years plus the life of the author (Canada). Seems to me that this means a lot of old scanned photos from City of Vancouver Archives, Library and Archives Canada, McCord Museum, BC Archives, VPL Special Collections databases are fair game here. I understand the value of striving for original photos on Wiki, but we can't really go back in time to get the photos we want for articles with significant historical content. These archives don't seem to address the issue head-on on their websites as it relates to Wiki's purposes, but why would they when they want to control usage of these photos and have people buy them. I've already added an old photo to Deadman's Island (Vancouver), but was previously only linking to photos. Unless someone knows that this is somehow a violation of something or other, I want to eventually add old photos to certain articles to enrich them, using this tag: {{PD-old-50}} If anyone else wants to do this, note Wiki's guidelines, adding the link and details on the photo's page, etc. Also see the discussion here: Talk:New Westminster, British Columbia#Historical photos issues. I'm pretty sure that the non-profit angle won't work, not because Wiki's a for-profit project, but because it's not a registered non-profit society or charity with "the Man" in Victoria. Anyway, if anyone knows of a reason why such images would get deleted, let me know, so I don't waste my time. thanks, Bobanny 21:39, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Merge Template:vancouverproject and Template:Vancouverproject-gvrd
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
merge -- Selmo (talk) 02:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC) I honestly don't see the point of having two seperate tags just for the sake of saying the subject dosen't have anything to do with the city of Vancouver, but the Greater Vancouver regional district. Not only does this add overhead for a rather trivial reason, but some articles have both tags placed on the same talk page. -- Selmo (talk) 23:01, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Survey
Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Support - there are a number of WikiProjects that use only one banner, but have additional class options within that banner. Two good examples are {{TrainsWikiProject}} and {{WPBeatles}}.--Bookandcoffee 15:26, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
- Support - Templates must be kept to a minamin to reduce confusion and make pages look neater.Canadianshoper 05:20, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Neutral - as the original creator, I'm fine with whatever you guys decide. However, I think the GVRD template should become the "main" template if the merging goes ahead. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 00:53, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
- Support - It makes sense to merge the two tags. I'd recommend that the consolidated template have a simple name like Template:VancouverProject, with the understanding that it applies to the entire GVRD. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 01:16, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - It would be fairly simple to include a "city" class in the single template, so people could (if so inclined) still designate which city the article was about. It would show up as a GVRD tag, with additional text at the bottom noting the city. --Bookandcoffee 02:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: You know... I kind of like that idea. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 04:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
- Support - There's an awful lot of overlap, and Vancouver services the burbs in a lot of ways, so I find the 2 tag system redundant. Personally, I don't see why we don't just amalgamate in real life.Bobanny 03:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I began to update Template:Vancouverproject-gvrd to reflect consensus. -- Selmo (talk) 18:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
{{Vancouver importance scale}}
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Vancouver/Assessment Department was recently set up - but the {{Vancouver importance scale}} still needs to be updated. It is currently just a copy from WP:UNION and completely irrelevant. If no one wants to update it I’ll just blank the criteria next week some time.--Bookandcoffee 19:50, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
HongCouver article for deletion
I nominated HongCouver for deletion. Go here to express your support. (Or disagreement, if you really must). After 5 days, the Lords of Wiki make the call to delete or keep.Bobanny 20:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Anyone who wants to get their 2 cents in and hasn't, the time is almost up. So far 8 people say delete/merge, and 2 say keep. Bobanny 21:14, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
After three weeks of deletion review and votes of 10,2,3 the article was deleted. Mkdw 21:55, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Task forces?
Now that the project banner refers to individule cities, perhaps we can create task forces for each one. -- Selmo (talk) 01:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Project directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 18:32, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- I've reviewed our Vancouver Project entry in the directory. Looks good. Mkdw 22:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)