Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Core biographies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

About suggesting changes Please do not suggest any changes to the list. We are currently at our intended number of biographies (200). So, in order to concentrate fully on the corresponding worklist, we are no longer accepting any suggestions to delete or add biographies for the time being. No matter how important you believe a biography is, it won't be added until we decide to reopen for nominations. Thanks for cooperating.
Archive
Archives

Contents

[edit] Proposal of adding/removing people

Since new people will only be added if someone is removed, how about when someone adds a new person to be considered they list a person who they think should be replaced, and people will vote on that particular swap. That way you can look at just the two people and determine who deserves to be on the list more. If someone gets deleted from the list someone can just re-nominate it against someone they feel is less important. This wouldn't have been a very efficient way to start the process, but now we have gotten down to the point where everyone on the list is pretty important and at least has 2 supporters each. VegaDark 04:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it'd work, because, for example, if someone wanted to remove Christopher Columbus to add Adolf Hitler, Hitler would probably win and Columbus would be removed. Both arguably deserve to be on the list though — and this is an example, I realize both are already on the list.
You know what, I thought we had already finalized the list weeks ago. After we deal with Errabee's nominations, I'm going to start a finalization vote until at LEAST Wikipedia 1.0. Otherwise, new people will keep joining in on the discussion every other day to add more people. ♠ SG →Talk 06:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I thought of that but I think we are to the point where most of the people who are deserving of being on the list (by our consensus) are already on there, so I wouldn't imagine there being too many changes. But yes, I agree this should be the last round of nominations for a long while, perhaps use this idea when they are being accepted again. VegaDark 06:56, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
You know, maybe we should just do it your way, but instead have people vote for both the addition and deletion candidates. If both succeed, then it works. If the deletion succeeds but not the addition, then the next addition which passes won't need a deletion candidate.
Hell, I think we should just contact everyone who was active in the last vote and get them to list one addition and one deletion each, or just one of either, or none at all if they only want to vote. We'll vote on all of the candidates, make the vote last only 48 hours to get this damn project going. What do you think? ♠ SG →Talk 09:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

(unindent) - I really don't think we should have any more votes, even the ones above. We thought we had a finalized list and went through the work of tagging them and assessing, only to have another round, and so we need to make sure the new changes get tagged/untagged. And the real purpose of this project isn't the list itself being perfect, but as a starting point for us to start working on these articles, and I don't feel like we've gotten anywhere in that direction. We can just state strong the real purpose of the list and ask people to help assess and improve, otherwise we're always going to have someone who doesn't think the list is perfect and we'll be stuck in an eddy, working to improve this list instead of the articles on it :-) --plange 15:28, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Everyone and their brother wants to work on changing the list, but so far plange and myself are the only people who have actually done any assessments. Let's leave the list alone until we finish the assessments. Here's a proposal: In order to nominate a person for addition or deletion from the list, you have to do at least 5 article assessments (with comments). Maybe that way we could actually get some work done. Kaldari 19:29, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I like that idea! --plange 19:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
That sounds good to me. First up, let's have a finalization vote. I'd like to officially close the list for at least Wikipedia 1.0, but that is incredibly far away; instead, how about we make the list unchangeable until January 1, 2007? ♠ SG →Talk 22:43, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I think the list as-is is fine until then. VegaDark 00:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree, no more voting, let's stop refining and start working :-) --plange 00:10, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Here is the worklist in case anyone forgot where it is :) Kaldari 00:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rolling up sleeves

Let's see if we can knock out the rest of the articles on the list that are missing assessments. You can see those on the work list at the bottom (they say "Unassessed" instead of Start or GA, etc)... --plange 17:47, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

We're down to 50 now. Kaldari 03:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Only 30 articles left to assess! Kaldari 17:31, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Only 20 left. Kaldari 23:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Down to the last 7! Pick an article to assess before they're all gone :)

Kaldari 23:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I did Francis Bacon and Henrik Ibsen. Still 5 to go! Errabee 01:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I'll take Frank Lloyd Wright --plange 01:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I've got Hobbes. Kaldari 21:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I did Giotto. Two left! Errabee 21:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Current FARs and FARCs

FYI, I've been nominating articles to FAR that no longer meet the criteria. We now have two in this process. Please lend a hand in getting these up to current FA standards!

--plange 22:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Current status of core biographies

What follows is a list of the status, as determined by the assessments on the talk pages, of the core biographies:

  • FA – Albert Einstein; Queen Elizabeth I; Galileo Galilei; Mahatma Gandhi; Carl Friedrich Gauss; Che Guevara; Henry VIII of England; Joan of Arc; James Joyce; Søren Kierkegaard; Abraham Lincoln; Louis XIV of France; Isaac Newton; Robert Oppenheimer; Blaise Pascal; Franklin D. Roosevelt; Max Weber; William Butler Yeats;
  • A – Attila the Hun; Cyrus the Great; Leonhard Euler; Michael Faraday; Henry Ford; Stephen Hawking; Ernest Hemingway; Victor Hugo; David Hume; Linus Pauling; Plato; Edgar Allan Poe; Thucydides; Vincent van Gogh;
  • GA – Thomas Aquinas; Johann Sebastian Bach; The Beatles; Jorge Luis Borges; Julius Caesar; Charlemagne; Winston Churchill; Charles Darwin; Thomas Edison; Hippocrates; Thomas Jefferson; Jesus; Antoine Lavoisier; Martin Luther; Babe Ruth; William Shakespeare; Nikola Tesla; George Washington;
  • B – Aeschylus; Akbar; Alexander the Great; Muhammed Ali; Dante Alighieri; Archimedes; Aristotle; Augustine of Hippo; Augustus; Jane Austen; Charles Babbage; Ludwig van Beethoven; Alexander Graham Bell; Otto von Bismarck; Simón Bolívar; Gautama Buddha; George Byron, 6th Baron Byron; Miguel de Cervantes; Charlie Chaplin; Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor; Cleopatra VII of Egypt; Christopher Columbus; Confucius; Constantine I; Nicolaus Copernicus; Hernán Cortés; Leonardo da Vinci; René Descartes; Charles Dickens; Walt Disney; Fyodor Dostoyevsky; T. S. Eliot; Euclid; Francis of Assisi; Benjamin Franklin; Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor; Frederick II of Prussia; Sigmund Freud; Johann Wolfgang Goethe; Johannes Gutenberg; Hannibal; Zheng He; Heraclius; Herodotus; Alfred Hitchcock; Adolf Hitler; Homer; Qin Shi Huang; Ivan IV of Russia; Michael Jordan; Franz Kafka; Immanuel Kant; John Maynard Keynes; Genghis Khan; Martin Luther King, Jr.; Akira Kurosawa; Laozi; Leibniz; Vladimir Lenin; Carolus Linnaeus; Niccolò Machiavelli; Nelson Mandela; Karl Marx; James Clerk Maxwell; Gregor Mendel; Michelangelo; Ho Chi Minh; Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart; Muhammad; Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi; Napolean I of France; Friedrich Nietzsche; Jesse Owens; Louis Pasteur; Paul of Tarsus; Pele; Peter I of Russia; Philip II of Spain; Pablo Picasso; Marco Polo; Ezra Pound; Elvis Presley; Marcel Proust; Pythagoras; Rembrandt; Jackie Robinson; Jean-Jacques Rousseau; Saladin; Walter Scott; Shaka; Adam Smith; Socrates; Joseph Stalin; Suleiman the Magnificent; Mother Teresa; Timur; Leo Tolstoy; Giuseppe Verdi; Virgil; Voltaire; Andy Warhol; James Watt; Walt Whitman; William I of England; Wright brothers; Mao Zedong; Zoroaster;
  • Start – Mikhail Baryshnikov; Columba; Frederick Douglass; Pierre de Fermat; Edward Gibbon; Hammurabi; Cai Lun; Claude Monet; Benito Mussolini; Raphael; Auguste Rodin; Ernest Rutherford; Emperor Taizong of Tang; Sun Tzu; Mary Wollstonecraft;
  • Unassessed – Neil Armstrong; Francis Bacon; Edmund Burke; John Calvin; Catherine II of Russia; Marie Curie; Louis Daguerre; Giotto di Dondone; Mikhail Gorbachev; Brothers Grimm; Henry II of England; Thomas Hobbes; Henrik Ibsen; Johannes Kepler; Bruce Lee; Joseph Lister, 1st Baron Lister; John Locke; Ferdinand Magellan; Guglielmio Marconi; Thomas Malthus; John Milton; Max Planck; Ptolemy; Margaret Sanger; Henry David Thoreau; Mark Twain; William Wordsworth; Frank Lloyd Wright;

Hope the information proves at least somewhat useful. Badbilltucker 16:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Columba

Someone else is going to have to explain how this individual qualifies for inclusion on this list. Personally, I can only see him qualifying on the basis of his possibly being the "grandfather" of medieval monasticism. Certainly, nothing in the biogrphy as it exists, or any of the brief biographies I've read, lead me to think that he is thought of as that. Unfortunately, I have no references before me that do provide such a basis for his inclusion. I am not suggesting that he be removed from the list, simply indicating that I hope someone can find a justification for his being included. Badbilltucker 13:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

You'll have to ask Calgacus. He put up a rather persistant campaign to have Columba included. Personally, I consider his notability to be marginal at best. Kaldari 16:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
There was an effort by some editors to ensure there was at least one Scottish figure included in this project. I think similar objections could be made to the inclusion of Walter Scott. Catchpole 07:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
It is remotely possible that he could be marked as significant as being a pivotal figure in How the Irish Saved Civilization (if he's mentioned in that book). And I agree about Walter Scott as well. Maybe in time we can propose the possible replacement with, for example, James II of England, Mary I of Scotland, Robert the Bruce, Robert Burns, William Wallace, or some similar Scottish figures. Alternately, the founder of monasticism, Saint Benedict, isn't on the list yet either, and maybe an exchange could be made there if he was included on religious reasons. Anyway, I'll try to find some more info about Columba to round out the article as time permits. Badbilltucker 23:31, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
He's definitely mentioned in that book... --plange 23:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
There are, actually, a number of Scots in the list, probably out of proportion to the size of the nation. Besides Walter Scott and Columba we have James Watt, David Hume and Adam Smith. Even Alexander Graham Bell was born in Scotland. White Guard 00:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
I think there are more important people in the world than some obscure Scottish saint, or local Scottish rulers who have had no real impact on the world (don't let the popularity of the movie Braveheart fool you!). People with real impact on the world: Anthony van Leeuwenhoek, the inventor of the microscope; Christiaan Huygens, who proposed the wave character of light (see wave-particle duality), Saint Peter, first pope; Pericles, the most important statesman of ancient Athens, he commissioned the building of the Acropolis; Tutankhamun, insignificant during his lifetime, but of great importance when his tomb was discovered, untouched by grave robbers; Ramses II, the most important Egyptian pharaoh, (probably erroneously) believed by many to be the Pharaoh during the time of Moses; Moses himself, enough said; King Solomon, builder of the first temple in Jerusalem, known for his wisdom in Judaism, Christianity and Islam. I could go on for ages, but as the voting booth is closed, there probably is no point in doing so. Errabee 00:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
It's a can of worms-best kept closed. White Guard 00:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
I will attempt to determine in what way Columba is mentioned in the above named book. If it points him out as being a pivotal figure in the foundation of medieval monasticism, and, by extenion, the reintroduction of Aristotlean thought to the west and so on, then I'll try to create a section in the page to that effect. That would definitely be sufficient cause for his inclusion. Badbilltucker 14:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, don't try to make him sound more important than he is just for the sake of the list. I imagine he will be removed at some point in the future anyway. Kaldari 15:51, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
He may well be. However, there is a really good case in favor of medieval monasticism being of sufficient importance to have someone included on the list to reflect it, and right now he's as good a choice to carry that banner as anyone else. And, of course, every name on the list, particularly the names closer to the bottom, are almost by definition eligible for being removed later. Badbilltucker 18:03, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] In popular culture

For the project members who encounter an In popular culture section during their work on core biographies, I have a suggestion: I recently created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the Alexander the Great page. This follows a precedent I started a year ago at Joan of Arc where, in the process of raising the article to FA, I branched and expanded the popular culture section into Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a FL. Other core biography figures probably have a similar mix of high culture and popular culture references that could merit a separate reference list. I'll be looking for more such instances. In the meantime, I'd like to encourage project participants to either imitate this example or contact me about biographies that could benefit from similar branching lists. Regards, Durova 14:35, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I have created a worksheet for this effort at User:Durova/Cultural depictions of core biography figures. Durova 19:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Assessments complete, where from here?

All of the Core Biographies have been assessed for quality. Here are the results:

Total: 200 articles! Index · Statistics · Log

Maybe we should figure out which articles are in the worst shape and nominate them for collaboration. Certainly Cai Lun and Hammurabi need a lot of help. Both are barely more than a stub. Columba, Ernest Rutherford, Louis Daguerre, Mikhail Baryshnikov, Pierre de Fermat, and Sun Tzu are also in pretty sad shape. Kaldari 15:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Start quality has been reduced to 18 articles. Apparently, Cai Lun had a secondary talk page under Talk:Ts'ai Lun, which I've now redirected. Errabee 15:56, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
I think nominating for collab is a smart move-- we can try and find the appropriate pre-existing collab for one of them and nom, if there's no appropriate project we can just do it at AID. This way we'll hopefully have more editors helping...--plange 15:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Take a Start class article to FA would be the best approach. Don't let up until all 200 are FA. --kingboyk 16:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Well the guidelines for Wikipedia 1.0 suggest at least GA quality. Perhaps we should shoot for that first. Kaldari 16:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
If inline citations are being used (which I think GA currently demands) there's probably not a lot of difference. Of course, you'll be aiming for comprehensive articles and brilliant prose anyway... Certainly I think make the core bios the key focus of WPBIO collaboration until they're all at least GA. They're our equivalent of the "eponymous article" aren't they? :) --kingboyk 16:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
I think the 18 start-class articles should be the first priority, collaborating on them to get them better. After that we can discuss the next step. VegaDark 20:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
I beg to differ :) First, we should identify which B-class articles are close to GA-grade, and which A-class articles and GA-class articles are close to FA-status. We should nominate them for GA resp FA and see what comments we can get. That way, our percentage of FA/GA gets up quickly. Errabee 20:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
BTW, Mark Twain is very close to winning ascension on Wikipedia:Article Creation and Improvement Drive. This is a core article currently rated B class. You should all go vote for it if you haven't already. Kaldari 20:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Yup, but I nominated Jane Austen there last month and she didn't succeed. She's also flagged for cleanup. Durova 01:25, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Whoa, there are 4 hours left and Mark Twain and Coffee are both tied at 41 votes! Kaldari 20:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
I subtracted 1 from FA-quality articles. Those 20 included the "to do" page from Plange. That makes 200. Hope you don't mind me editing the numbers. Errabee 18:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Hey Plange, do you need to keep the WPBio template on your "to do" page? Kaldari 19:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Nope,, sorry, was using that for a sandbox for some new code will get that deleted.... I have another proposition too for next steps. We have 3 articles in danger of losing their FA (I've listed them on the new announcements page)... maybe we work together to try and save them? --plange 18:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Mark Twain was picked! --plange 22:13, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Louis XIV was just demoted from FA --plange 21:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

As was Abraham Lincoln a couple weeks ago. Kaldari 21:50, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Vincent van Gogh has been nominated to become GA collaboration of the week. Durova 20:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Formatting

Whoa, this page just got real ugly. What happened? Kaldari 22:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

sorry, you guys can revert it if you want... I was formatting it to match the rest of WPBiography and wanted to include the dynamic statistics log and also added a new announcements/to-do area.... --plange 21:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
I like the stats and announcements. Not so fond of all the boxes and borders and having to scroll down a few pages to see the actual list. If other people are fine with it though, I'll leave it alone :) Kaldari 21:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Progress so far

Since we first completed our assessments a month ago, here is the progress that has been made:

  • a net total of 3 articles dropped from Featured Article class to A class
  • a net total of 3 articles dropped from Good Article class to B class or Start class

Hmm, not so exciting, huh? Kaldari 01:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I've got an idea for how to acheive some actual progress. Let's identify the one core biography that is most in need of help. Once we have agreed on it, we will nominate it for Article Creation and Improvement Drive and try to drum up support for it. While we're waiting on it to win the drive nomination, we can start collaborating on it ourselves. Sound like a good idea? Let's take a look at our 19 Start class articles and see which ones are the worst (and could potentially garner interest from your average Wikipedian)...

Core Bio most needing help - cast your votes!

Kaldari 02:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help with a peer review

I have put Mary Wollstonecraft up for peer review. I'm hoping this can be our first example of bringing a Start-class article up to FA-quality. If you have the time, please read over the article and contribute your thoughts to the peer review. Thanks! Kaldari 06:31, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Mary Wollstonecraft is now a featured article candidate. Feel free to review the article and add comments to the nomination. Kaldari 22:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive candidates

Three of the core biographies, Archimedes, Jesus, and Vladimir Lenin, are current candidates for the Article Improvement Drive. This might be one way to help get some of them up to higher status. Badbilltucker 00:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mark or Delete FAs

It might be useful to mark or delete the FA Core biographies so that people don't click on biographies that don't need help. Awadewit 04:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • We should mark them with the GA or FA symbols like in the vital articles list. - Mocko13 13:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I've marked them with GA or FA symbols. Errabee 13:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I've also included all A-class articles that have a current GA-status. What worried me, was that several A-class articles didn't have GA-status; one was explicitly delisted as GA. Perhaps it is time to look into these biographies and put them up for an official GA status? It concerns the following articles:
I switched all of them over to B until they get nominated for GA. I think they will all need work to some extent or another before going through GA. - Mocko13 14:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I think demoted FA's should automatically get A status, which is why I rated Linus Pauling A-class. Even if the article used to be a GA, they are automatically removed from that when they reach FA status so any demoted article will not be a GA unless someone submits that for review. VegaDark 23:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't agree that they should automatically get A status. If they were FA for a long time and got demoted, chances are with the inflation on standards, they don't even live up to the GA standards, and should be rated B. Errabee 23:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, I guess it couldn't hurt to put them up for GA review first. VegaDark 23:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Nominating them for GA was my original intention, but some of them have a lot of citation needed tags and I thought they wouldn't make it through the GA process. If you all are willing to help respond to what I think will be almost inevitable holds on each of the articles, I'll go ahead and nominate them. - Mocko13 01:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Maybe in a few weeks during spring break. I've been really busy with school lately as well with other Wikipedia duties so I doubt I would be able to help much right now. VegaDark 02:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

<- A related point: somebody proposed setting up an A class review department. If you folks want to support (or oppose) that idea or help set it up please comment there. --kingboyk 12:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/i/k/Wikipedia_talk%7EWikiProject_Biography_Core_biographies_3853.html"