Category talk:Wikipedia CD Selection
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Several people have asked where to discuss suitability of the tag WPCD.
You can discuss inclusion on the talk pages here. However, the process once an article is on the CD category is not automatic inclusion. The article will go into an editorial funnel when the next run happens and may have sections or the whole thing deleted if at that moment in time quality is not high enough. The editorial funnel is only allowed to delete not otherwise alter though (like to volunteer: put your name below and we can sort you a couple of hundred articles each nearer the time). Some topics which are not in a good state like this one I think should stay in for now as the topic is important enough and central to schools curriculum. The next run isn't planned til Sept so someone may have sorted it by then. --BozMo talk 08:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Categories
Any preference on:
- Aircraft or aviation?
- Ancient history or ancient world? Maurreen 05:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks again for your help on this. I am just off to look at all the templates. Aircraft or aviation is currently quite small isn't it? Space craft and space might be a lot bigger?
- I personally prefer the ancient world but does it make any difference to content? --BozMo talk 07:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Probably not, but I was feeling indecisive. Maurreen 07:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I'll make it "Aviation and space exploration" unless anyone objects. Maurreen 05:42, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
-
Ah, I figure the planets would go under "Astronomy" or somesuch. I would use "Aviation and space exploration" for things like:
- Space Race
- Space Shuttle Challenger
- Space Shuttle Challenger disaster
- Space Shuttle Columbia
- Space Shuttle Endeavour
- Space Shuttle program
- Space exploration
- Space station
- Space suit
- SpaceShipOne flight 15P
- OK? You did have in mind for "Aviation and space exploration" to be combined, right? Maurreen 18:23, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- OK. I hadn't thought about numbers in general. Maurreen 19:02, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] PockBot (run by IP:81.151.239.119) - Category articles summary as of 16:15:59, Sat Dec 9, 2006
Edit by PockBot (on behalf of an anonymous user)
-removed months-old automated bot data Dialectric 17:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] template formatting and text ?
I like the idea of the category specific templates for the WPCD, and have some questions/suggestions regarding them: 1. Can the capitalization be made uniform without messing up current systems? Ancient is capitalized while airspace is not, for example.
2.Categories used; I would suggest borrowing the categories from the Wikipedia 1.0 project:
:Miscellaneous :Arts :Everyday Life :Geography :History :Language & Communication :Life Sciences :Mathematics :Philosophy & Religion :Physical Sciences :Social Sciences & Society :Technology and Engineering
...with possibly the addition of more specific life sciences categories for animals and plants, and a 'people' category to seperate out biographies.
3. There has been some discussion on the project talk page about the ambiguity of the text of the general WPCD template; specifically, it uses the "either included in the Wikipedia CD Selection or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version" when it might be clearer if it stated 'this article is a canditate for inclusion in the upcoming 2007 WPCD release." That is, I like the idea of the tag 'looking forward' to the next release, rather than focusing on what had been included. If that seems necessary to include, maybe a sentence like "To see other canidate articles, and view the previous WPCD included list, see the project page", or something to that effect.
Dialectric 17:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
"this article is a candidate for inclusion in the upcoming 2007 WPCD release" is better. Also probably time to move the project page to 2007. The CD will have a specific category structure, based on the 1.0 one; the subcats added to the talk pages weren't widely enough used so now we are trying to pick up the correct cat by bot but not perfectly working yet. The next run of the script will be up and viewable with this in a few days. --BozMo talk 18:33, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
