Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council/Directory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


WikiProject Council

General information
Main page talk
   To-do list
   Templates
Contacts talk

WikiProject guide
Introduction talk
   WikiProjects
   Task forces
   Technical notes

Resources
Assessment FAQ
Directory talk
Proposals talk
Newsletters talk
WikiProjects Portal
edit · changes

Contents

[edit] Green and Gray?

I'm an idiot, I know that, but what is the difference between the green and gray boxes in the charts? Badbilltucker 19:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Green means the project is active, gray means that it's not; it's controlled by the active= parameter on the template. :-) Kirill Lokshin 19:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for asking it, it's not evident. I put a sentence into the leading. :) NCurse Image:Edu science.png work 19:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Geograph British Isles project

Listed, but should it be? Yomanganitalk 01:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Err, it's not a WikiProject at all. Definitely shouldn't be here. Kirill Lokshin 01:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Their "faux WikiProject" category is a strange one too. Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_September_7#Category:British_Geograph_project. --kingboyk 15:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shortcuts?

Are these needed? The underlying names aren't being displayed, and keeping the list in shortcut form seems unnecessarily confusing to me. Kirill Lokshin 14:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

The only reason I'm doing so is for purposes of keeping the list down to a managable length by abbreviating where possible. The alphabetical list was 51 kilobytes long; this list, with all the additional information in it, is definitely going to be a lot longer. Granted, that may be insufficient reason. Several projects have no shortcuts established, and they are being entered in with the full names of each relevant section. If you believe the reason to be insufficient, and it may very well be, then just say so and I shall change everything back to the full names. Badbilltucker 15:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Meh. I don't know how big of an issue page size will be in practice; but my dislike of using shortcuts in places like this stems mostly from the fact that doing so breaks Special:Recentchangeslinked. Your call, though. Kirill Lokshin 15:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Don't worry about page length, we can break down into subpages later if need be. --kingboyk 15:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Good enough cause right there. The abbreviations will be reverted as I get back into each of the subcategory charts. I know I'm going to get to them all in time today. Right now the apparently haphazard entry is being done to ensure that any projects, like Superman, which are only linked to one other project, maybe like a descendant, are included too. Badbilltucker 15:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Excellent! This is terrific work you're doing :) --kingboyk 15:30, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Music projects

I'd suggest further subdividing these, or at least seperating out the projects dedicated to just one group or artist (of which there are now at least 5). --kingboyk 15:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Full well intend to do so. However, exactly how to subdivide is probably best determined after they're all entered in and we can see just how many projects fall within each category. There may well be some that are found to fit into an entirely new and different subcategory. I think we'll probably want to put all the projects related to the United States, of which there are about 100 I think, into one or more separate categories too. But reorganization might best be accomplished when all the data on all the projects is already included. Badbilltucker 15:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] A Blues Project

I suggest creating a project for Blues. I would be happy to contribute fully with the help of other Wikipedians knowledgable about the music and history of the Blues. Thoughts? --Bentonia School 08:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

A Blues Task Group would be quite reasonable as a subcommittee of WikiProject Music. I am currently considering proposals for other subcommittees to the same in order to fully document other genres such as Dance-pop, Arena rock, Country music, Bubblegum pop, &c. Even though underqualified to administer such committees, I already see the utility thereof and may join such a subcommittee in the near future. - B.C.Schmerker 03:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template instructions

I'd like to move the template usage instructions to a different page (probably the template itself) but I don't want to give anyone an edit conflict. --kingboyk 17:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Hmm? I would think that their current placement is quite useful for, say, new project creators who may want to add their projects; is hiding them really a good idea? Or did you have some transclusion trick in mind? Kirill Lokshin 17:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
No, it's just - to use a horrible phrase - "I can't see the woods for the trees". Instead of seeing a list of WikiProjects I've got a screen full of template parameters :) --kingboyk 18:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Hehe. Well, it's no big deal either way; just make sure to leave a link to the template if you move the instructions there! ;-) Kirill Lokshin 19:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Splitting into subpages

It looks like the heavy use of the WikiProject template is moving us closer to the transclusion limit; we're at 1.4M (out of a possible 2M) right now. Thus, it's probably time to think about splitting this into subpages.

Would there be major problems in using the current top-level sections for an initial set of subpages? Kirill Lokshin 20:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Split it! :) NCurse Image:Edu science.png work 06:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I've split the page out into five subpages and have created some halfway-decent navigational material at the top of each. Kirill Lokshin 20:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Looks like we're going to need some more splits, as at least the culture page has hit the template limit. Should we just split out sections into their own subpages? Kirill Lokshin 15:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I personally do not like the new format because it loses the nested hierarchy from before. For example, there used to be the Christianity Project with the 9 denomination subprojects under it, but now they are alphabetically listed with other religious placed between them. This also applies to a number of other section, including Novels, US Highways, Medicine, Tree of Life, etc. In fact, to my dismay, I just realized that this directory has completely replaced the older "List of WikiProjects". I feel strongly that the nested hierarchy from before should be added to these pages because it is much harder to find specific content when the bigger projects are mixed in with the more specific.--Andrew c 15:43, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Please see my reply here. Kirill Lokshin 16:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Filmmaking

Is this really a culture and arts project? I originally included it in the technology section because the project is mainly interested in topics involving filmmaking technology and technique, not aesthetics. I can understand why it was lumped together with Film, but the two projects' scopes are massively different for the most part. Also, most of our featured articles, such as Panavision and 35 mm film are listed under Technology in the Wikipedia:Featured articles page. Girolamo Savonarola 19:41, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I would expect that the average visitor would expect to find it lumped with the other film/TV projects, though, rather than the technology ones. Kirill Lokshin 20:52, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
In cases like this one, where a particular project might fit in more than one group, would we want to list it in each group or not? Considering the breakup into five pages, it might help. Badbilltucker 14:37, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
I have no objection to listing it in multiple places so long as somebody from the project takes responsibility for updating both sets of links if necessary. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 14:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
It would be better just to make a note in the technology section ("Filmmaking can be found in the arts and culture section") rather than duplicating the entry - that way the project members only have to update it in one place, and we don't have the problem of not knowing which is the "master" record. Yomanganitalk 15:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, I wonder if we might want a variation on the little WikiProject entry template that doesn't give any of the regular fields but just a pointer to another section where the "master record" is. That would allow including such cross-section links inline without any fiddling around with the formatting. Kirill Lokshin 15:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
That's a good idea. Yomanganitalk 15:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I've added the listed-in= parameter for secondary listings; documentation & examples are on the template page. Hopefully everything still works. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 00:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Probability

Wikipedia:WikiProject Probability seems to be inactive. There has been no real activity since May, and I had no positive response when I asked about activity a couple of days ago. --Salix alba (talk) 10:36, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I changed the project's state to inactive. Thanks for the note. NCurse work 11:06, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please make no changes now

I just noted that the draft project directory links to this page, so that the new draft will have to be moved in. Please wait a few minutes until the transfer is completed, and then double check. Thank you. B2T2 23:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Restructure proposal - earth sciences

This proposal is to add an earth sciences heading to the draft project directory structure as depicted on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory/Science. Currently the Soil project is listed under Horticulture and Gardening with Geography as it's main portal. This is not supported by statements on the soil project: “The parents of this WikiProject are Portal:Earth sciences and WikiProject Science.” This statement is consistent with the project's scope: “The purpose of WikiProject Soil is to improve content within the Category:Soil science and associated subcategories.” I propose that an earth sciences (see category:earth sciences) directory heading be initiated and both geology and soil be placed there.

  • Support as original nominator. Because soil science and geology are independent sub-disciplines of the geosciences, I do not support moving the project's directory placement from gardening to geology. A similar statement can be made as to the independence of soil science in relationship to geography, agronomy, and engineering. The constructive alternative is moving the soil project from gardening to science. -- Paleorthid 18:58, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Seems fine (although perhaps "Geosciences" would be a better section name?). Just go ahead and do it, though; there's no need to go through a formal proposal here. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 19:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tree of life

Do we really need all the groups Arthropods, mammals, marine life and plants, all should be part of tree of life?? or do we really want many porjects defined twice? If so sharks should be part of tree of life also. The overview of the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Tree_of_Life#overview page does a pretty good jobs of defining what is part of the tree of life project and defining ist sub projetcs, I suggest the same structure is used here and we remove all the other groups. To do that we need to have a way of indicating sub projects and sub-sub projects, but that should be easy to do with just indentation? Stefan 05:23, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, we've explicitly avoided indicating hierarchical relationships between projects in favor of simply listing them as pure topics. It's a mess that I don't think is really worth getting into.
As far as projects being defined twice: that's what the listed-in parameter is for! The idea here is to make it as easy as possible for people to find projects they're interested in, not to maintain some "official" listing of all the subtle interactions among them. Kirill Lokshin 05:40, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Ah, never mind that last part; it looks like there was an actual problem with projects being double-listed with their own sub-section. I've removed the double-listing; sorry for not realizing that was the issue in the first place! Kirill Lokshin 05:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
OK, good now the listings makes sense! Stefan 07:43, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jewish culture

I'm wondering about the placement of WikiProject Jewish culture under WikiProject Judaism. Judaism is a religion. Jewish culture relates more to Jewish ethnicity. See, for example Secular Jewish culture: this article is probably as central to that WikiProject as any one article, and as you can easily see, it is no more an article about religion than Culture of England is about the Church of England. - Jmabel | Talk 06:48, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, we tend to go for very liberal cross-referencing, in order to gather as many interested editors to each project as possible; but if you think it's really an issue, you can remove the cross-reference to it from under the Judaism section. Kirill Lokshin 14:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Football (soccer) in Australia

WikiProject A-League has been expanded to form WikiProject Football (soccer) in Australia, which still has the A-League player project (assessment/collaboration), but also a separate assessment department. Was not sure how to change the directory to reflect this. Thanks – AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 11:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, if all that's left of the original project is the assessment page, I'd just link it from the "notes" field. Kirill Lokshin 14:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hierarchy corrections

Some of the hierarchy here is strange:

  • Wikiproject sound is listed under "physics", but its actually about adding sound to WP articles, and has nothing to do with physics.
  • Wikiproject pseudoscience is general, and not a branch of physics.
  • Wikiproject electronics is a technology, and is not a branch of physics.
  • Astronomy *is* a branch of physics, but I guess its ok to list it separately.
  • Scales and tuning is not a part of physics, but is a part of music, and belongs in the culture and arts listing.

linas 05:20, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Mmm, this directory is a fairly new project, and is quite rough in spots; please don't hesitate to move things around if we've put them in the wrong place! ;-) Kirill Lokshin 05:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
OK, mostly fixed; but I did not move the music projects off this page, though. Notable in their absence is Wikipedia: WikiProject Rational Skepticism and Wikipedia: WikiProject intelligent design, which I would take as sister projects to pseudoscience. I think there are projects on astrology and paranormal etc. as well, which are not listed here... linas 05:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
The main listing for that whole group is here; pseudoscience just needs to be properly cross-linked. Kirill Lokshin 05:43, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sports Family Categories

I have been looking at categories more closely recently. Today, I decided that there are a lot articles that would be more easily navigated if we developed a Sports family hierarchy. I have started to fill in what I could not find out there in the section that follows: User:TonyTheTiger#Categories_Created. Can you tell me if anyone at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council/Directory/Culture/Sports would be interested in getting involved in Sports family categorization or if there is a good way to proceed in such an endeavor. TonyTheTiger 02:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New wikiproject

I wish to create a new wikiproject that will monitor the new pages list and delete all the spam. Is this ok? -Slash- 04:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Personally, this project sounds rather a lot like what New Page Patrol already does. You might want to check with them to see if they can foresee any potential conflicts down the road and/or whether they would be able to help you in the effort. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing such a group included in the Project Directory. Badbilltucker 16:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I would love to start a wikiproject on Unitarian Universalism or maybe an even broader one on Unitarian and Universalism to help expand and give a focus to articles pertaining to UUism and it’s mired groups followers and history. How do I go about this, and should maybe it be only a category under the religion project. --Devin Murphy (EST 12:08pm WE/12-20/06)

[edit] Top Ten

Is it poissble, or a good idea, to create a Top Ten or Twenty list of Wikiprojects? My recent efforts on WP:LGBT have been fuelled mainly by what I could find on WP:BIO, WP:MILHIST, and WP:COMICS, because these are the ones I saw mentioned as being amongst the biggest and most successful projects. A list of the largest projects would surely be useful to founders of fledgling projects looking to expand. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Looking For Foreign Language Wikiprojects

Articles in English about parts of foreign languages or something like that, something to help me learn foriegn languages. Just H 01:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Projects: Typo vs. Spell Check

I think that WikiProject Spell Check should be removed. Both WikiProject Typo and WikiProject Grammar cover the scope and goals of Spell Check. Additionally, Spell Check has only one member, compared to about 100 in Typo and about 50 in Grammar.

If you wish to discuss this issue further, visit this page's entry.

Twas Now 01:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Little help...

How does one join a Wikiproject? Looking forward to getting more involved. --Bentonia School 08:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Just show up, basically. Most projects have some form of list of members, if you feel like putting your name down; beyond that, just participate in whatever the project does. :-) Kirill Lokshin 18:02, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Groovy. Thanks. --Bentonia School 07:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CompSci under Science?

WikiProject Computer science is currently placed under the Science section in the WikiProject directory.

It would be more accurate to place it under the Mathematics section, as it is really more a branch of mathematics than of science.

— Twas Now 06:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC) Whoever originated the term "computer science" was clearly too stupid and shortsighted to predict the existence Wikipedia and its OCD-afflicted editors (i.e. me).

  • How about under "Computer Arts"? Only kidding. Where is the WikiProject directory? -Susanlesch 07:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Brilliant idea! But in all seriousness, WikiProject Council/Directory/Science
  • Likewise in all seriousness, this is where I expected the directory Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory/. Sorry I was confused. -Susanlesch 10:10, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Actually, both computer science and mathematics have their own sections in the directory. The reason they're both on the "Science" page is because we want to keep the page structure reasonably simple, not because there's some deep hierarchy being created. Kirill Lokshin 14:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I missed that. You're right. I guess what I wanted to know is why it is a secondary listing in the very first Science section. I understand why History of Science is there — it is closely related to the science project. But why does Computer Science merit this secondary listing while Biology does not? Anyway, I am going to make that change now as per WP:BB — Twas Now 06:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry how is Computer Science more related to Mathematics than the rest of Science? Sure theoretical topics use lots of Maths but it's like saying Physics isn't a science because of the heavy use of Mathematics; what makes Computer Science a science is the motives of the investigation, we aren't trying to uncover abstract and pure fundamentals of Mathematics it's about applying Mathematics to computation. Computer Science on Wikipedia is used as a very large umbrella term. For instance all of Artificial Intelligence and Biologically Inspired Computing comes under Computer Science, these have more to do with Nature and Psychology than they do Mathematics :/ I don't see how this ungrounded statement is a reasoned argument for the move? When it really comes down to it everything is just maths :) MattOates (Ulti) 23:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
This subject has been resolved for over a month, and the move of which you speak was more for style purposes: The other subfields of science do not have a place in the first Science section of that directory, so computer science being in there was silly. The only things placed up there are projects about science (e.g. History of Science, Science pearls) and things without a proper subfield (e.g. Archaeology).
But since you brought it up:
Computer science is sometimes criticized as being insufficiently scientific, a view espoused in the statement "Science is to computer science as hydrodynamics is to plumbing"
Computer science is considered by some to have a much closer relationship with mathematics than many scientific disciplines. Early computer science was strongly influenced by the work of mathematicians such as Kurt Gödel and Alan Turing, and there continues to be a useful interchange of ideas between the two fields in areas such as mathematical logic, category theory, domain theory, and algebra.
—from Computer science#Relationship with other fields
The origins of computer science lie heavily in mathematics, but unlike mathematics, computer science is often held to be an experimental discipline.
—from Diversity of computer science#Computer science and other fields
Some claim that computer science is not an experimental science (but this is controversial), and (as with fields such as political science and, indeed, all the social sciences) some have considered the name a misnomer. Scientific computing, though it sounds similar, is only a tangentially related field involving computer programming for hard- and soft-science applications. Despite these seeming ambiguities, the name computer science has remained both common and unambiguously well-understood within the field it names.
—from Diversity of computer science#Computer science may be a misnomer
It is a science to some degree, but it can just as well be considered a subfield of mathematics. For example, at the University of Waterloo, computer science students can receive a Bachelor of Mathematics or even a Bachelor of Computer Science, not a Bachelor of Science degree (though I suppose it is somewhat uncommon to even have a Faculty of Mathematics at all). − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 01:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Science Organizations

There is a new Wikiproject on organizations entitled Wikipedia:WikiProject Organizations that is being started. I recommend we have any science organizations go under this project in order to avoid conflicts between the science and the organization projects. Chris 16:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I have started a wikiproject

A new wikiproject can be found at WP:CCT or WP:CLCT for Current Local City Time. --CyclePat 06:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I am doing prepwork for a proposed WikiProject Perfumery that User:TinaSparkle has suggested as a replacement for the "paper-only" WikiProject Cosmetics. This last WikiProject would have been appropriate for my brand name product Stub Electric Youth (fragrance), which describes a now-out-of-manufacture fragrance from Revlon Consumer Products Corporation developed in 1988 and marketed the following year; doubtless the same thing happens to celebrity scents and other cosmetic fragrances, a proposed study segment for WikiProject Perfumery, all the time. Where would further workup discussions be located? - B.C.Schmerker 13:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Organization of the lists

Besides the current organization, I'd like to see a separate list of all the WikiProjects. I'd suggest just doing a long list that is alphabetized. I'm getting tired of looking for WikiProjects that aren't where I think that they should be. For example, why isn't WikiProject National Register of Historic Places listed on the WikiProject Council/Directory/History and society page? Instead, it's only on the WikiProject Council/Directory/Geographical/North America page.

I first looked for WikiProject LGBT studies on the WikiProject Council/Directory/Culture page, only to discover it's only on the WikiProject Council/Directory/Science page. BlankVerse 03:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I am going to be lazy (because I am tired), and simply say be bold, muddafugga! However, if you move WikiProject National Register of Historic Places to the geography section (good call), keep it as a secondary listing in the history section! It is relevant to both, though as you suggested, more relevant to geography. − Twas Now 06:21, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I see that instead of being lazy, you decided to be an uncivil DICK. BlankVerse 22:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
If any of you should ever have any such complaints or criticisms about the structure of the directory, contact me directly with information about where you want it as a secondary and a primary listing, and I will be more than happy to insert it. I regret to say that I haven't been quite as diligent about putting in the newer projects in all the relevant locations, but am more than willing to acknowledge any mistakes I might have made. Badbilltucker 02:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your offer to help. It is greatly appreciated.
It's just been frustrating for me at times because I want to be diligent about adding the proper stubs, or the proper WikiProject banners on talk pages, but sometimes it seems like I end up looking at two or three pages before I find the WikiProject that I know is active.
On the other hand, it's probably a PITA for the WP Council folks to try to keep on top of newly created or recently revived WikiProjects. BlankVerse 05:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
That was uncivil? I commended you for noticing the misplaced project, and recommended you relocate it. Please explain your charge. − Twas Now 06:29, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
PS Remember that friends of gays should not be allowed to edit articles!

[edit]  

Your   characters are displayed as the number 2003 inside a rectangle for me, which looks rather silly.

I'd suggest either using   characters instead, or better still, the colon-indenting used mainly in talk page discussions. ~ Keiji (iNVERTED) (Talk | Contribs) 00:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Featured user pages

Hi, please comment here. Thanks: --Sadi Carnot 19:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discrimination project?

Why no unified project dealing with discrimination topics? - Keith D. Tyler (AMA) 18:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Experimental Music

Hi everyone. I would like to propose the creation of an Experimental Music Project. Countless bands and musicians don't fall on the scope of any of the existing projects. Cheers. AxiomShell 23:56, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

An Experimental Music subcommittee sounds like an excellent proposal for WikiProject Music, as many chamber and symphonic ensembles expanding on Schönberg's technique inventions are not systematically documented, nor are most avant-garde music styles. Although underqualified to administer such a subcommittee, I could do useful research on such out-of-the-box genres. I don't know if the available material justifies a dedicated WikiProject Experimental Music as of yet. - B.C.Schmerker 04:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crime

I noticed our project WP:CRIME is not found in the category. Can someone add it in? Wooyi 02:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] But no debate...

So we have the theatre and other performance arts, but no debate? There is a plethora of things to discuss on debate and related topics, but seeing as I've only had my account for about a week or so, I don't really know what to do... Rockinbuddy 05:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Under Computer Science

Should there be a catagory for Video Game Programming Languages like Dark Basic Professional, Torque Engine, Game Maker, and other popular gaming engines?

[edit] What project

hey everyone

what project does borderfest fall under? can someone add the project that this falls under to the page? thanks Maverick423 16:14, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Olympic football tournaments in 1984 and 1988 match facts

Hello! Can your page add the match facts for the 1984 and 1988 Olympic football tournaments.

88.88.47.7 14:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC) 16 March 2007 15.39 (UTC)

[edit] Transclusion limit

It seems that Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory/Culture had hit the transclusion limit. I moved the documentation of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory/WikiProject to a subpage to avoid this problem --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 19:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mrsoandso

RANT WARNING- I was disgusted to find that the article Mrsoandso was entirely copied from [1]. It has been over two months since it received an "unreliability" tag and still nobody has done anything about it. A google search which took me the best part of 5 seconds clearly showed the copyright infringement. I am angered at the way the Wikiproject music portal did not address this especially as the article was tagged with the unreliable tag. I have now edited the article, but I cannot believe that it has taken over two months for anyone to realise this. People on Wikiproject music buck up your ideas!! Dsims209 15:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Editors are all volunteers, and WikiProjects are just points of collaboration between them. So please, don't bitch because someone else didn't fix something. -- Ned Scott 07:14, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re-positioning of Opera

Just a note to say that I have re-positioned opera under performing arts, in the logical place where it always used to be and should be!. Regards. - Kleinzach 01:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Broadcasting not media?

Very odd that broadcasting is not under media! Surely illogical? - Kleinzach 00:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Astronomy / Astrology

Instead of astronomy, better Astros. --HybridBoy 11:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal for organizing Wikipedia Maintenence projects

Currently they are organized as a single alphabetized list and are very difficult to navigate. I think that they should be categorized in a more meaningful way. I think this will have a positive effect on WikiProject enrollment, since it will be easier for prospective members to find projects that intrest them. It will also help prevent overlap among the various projects. Here is my proposed scheme. Note that I have grouped a small number of projects into more than one group, and have found that a few projects can be grouped under parent projects.

  • Content improvement: projects dedicated to improving the encyclopedic content, facts, and research in articles
Fact and Reference Check
Abandoned Articles
Anti-Stub
Countering Systemic Bias
Expert Request Sorting
Integration
Keywords
Lists
Missing Encyclopedic Articles
Neutrality Project
Red Link Recovery
Resource Exchange
Usability
Wikipedians against Censorship
Projects addressing content related to a specified topic
Pedophilia Article Watch
Scientific Peer Review
Wikipedians for Local History
  • Article assessment
Release Version
Good Articles
Version 1.0 Editorial Team
Fair Use
Free Book Covers
Graphic Lab
Image monitoring
Maps
OpenStreetMap
  • Sound (Possible parent project: Sound)
Spoken Wikipedia
External Links
Laundromat
Trivia Cleanup
League of Copyeditors
Grammar
[[WP:.|Punctuation]]
Typo
Location Format
Microformats
Red Link Recovery
Spam
Templates
Infoboxes
Inline Templates
Messageboxes
Succession Box Standardization
Usability
Wikify
  • Navigation: projects to make Wikipedia more organized and navigable
Categories
Disambiguation
Integration
Lists
Portals
Redirect
Red Link Recovery
Stub Sorting
Usability
  • Maintenence tasks: Projects to complete some of the thankless jobs not covered under the previous two categories
AFD Closing
Deletion Sorting
Deletion
Inclusion
Moving Free Images to Wikimedia Commons
Notability Sorting
Proposed Deletion Patrolling
Stub removal
Echo
French Collaboration Project
Missing Encyclopedic Articles
  • Policy discussion and advocacy: Projects which aim to review, discuss, and assist in the creation of new policy; or projects which advocate a particular policy
WikiProject on Adminship
Deletion
Inclusion
Wikipedians against Censorship
Wikipedians for Writing an Encyclopedia
  • User services: projects which assist users in specific ways
Classroom Coordination
Edit Counters
Notice Boards
Tip of the Day
User Help
User Page Help
User Scripts
User Warnings
Open Proxies
  • Wikipedia community: projects which enhance Wikipedia's community by encouraging positive contributors and penalizing negative ones.
Awards
Department of Fun
Hall of Fame
Kindness Campaign
User Categorization
User Warnings
Userboxes
Wikipedians for Writing an Encyclopedia
Open Proxies
  • Supplemental projects: "Side projects" designed to bring Wikipedia to a wider audience
WikiWorld
Release Version
Wikidemia
Vandalism Studies
Wikipedia Weekly
Version 1.0 Editorial Team

Fishal 21:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

As a PS, I would like to consider adding all of the Category:Wikipedian organizations to the Directory. Fishal 22:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Where's the link to the original that you don't like? -- TimNelson 11:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Wikipedia is the current directory. Oh, I also should note that I haven't tried to categorize the inactive projects yet. Fishal 12:07, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
I like your overall idea, but I think it would be better organised slightly differently. For a start, I think it should be split into two pages. The first page could be "Wikipedia Content Improvement" (only for content improvement that isn't related to a specific topic area), which could be organised as follows:
  • General (this is the section you called "Content Improvement")
  • Image improvement
  • Sound
  • Cleanup
  • Navigation
  • Translation
The other page could be called "Wikipedia Maintenance" (ie. could remain where it is), and could have the following headings:
  • Maintenance tasks
  • Policy
  • Community (just a heading with subheadings)
    • General (This is the one you called "Wikipedia community")
    • User services
    • Supplemental projects
Note that I'm using all the categories you came up with, just slightly reorganising them. I think also that generally, alphabetic order should be used, with the possible exception of putting the main project first. eg. on Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Culture/Music#Music, the main Music category has "Music" as the first WikiProject, even though it's out of order.
-- TimNelson 03:22, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
I like your suggestions. Fishal 12:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oasis Wikiproject?

Let's Create ONE!! Bobo6balde66 17:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

anyone i would start it but dont know who Bobo6balde66 19:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inter-WikiProject dispute, Infoboxes

I ran into an inter-WikiProject dispute involving Infoboxes. WikiProject Guitarists holds to certain requirements for Template:Guitarist infobox which appear common to Template:Infobox musical artist as currently maintained by WikiProject Musicians but also include provision for audio samples, unlike Template:Infobox musical artist in its present form. The text sizes and width divisions differ in the data sections of the two Infoboxes. Can these psrtially common requirements be deconflicted in such a way that a common Infobox template can be used for musical artist data across WikiProjects Musicians, Guitarists, Organists, &c.? Pleas post recommendations to User talk:B.C.Schmerker/Template sub:Experimental Infobox, which page I have created for the purpose of expediting this process. - B.C.Schmerker 05:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Update: No suggestions having come in, I will assume that the existing Infoboxes will be kept and request deletion for my Experimental Infobox. - B.C.Schmerker 06:06, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Techniques etc.

We need a project for musical techniques such as major chord and pizzicato. Hyacinth 02:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About the Project

Can we create our own or not? --  PNiddy  Go!  17:36, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biology

Please don't use acronyms. What are NLP concepts? Abee60 07:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of academic disciplines

Head over to Talk:List_of_academic_disciplines#Rename_to_reflect_content for a discussion on what is an academic discipline. -- Alan Liefting talk 23:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Geography: Question about list of notable people that live in town X

I see more and more articles about towns and cities that feature long lists of notable people that live in the particular town, or that were born there. In most cases, these lists do not rise above trivia. Has there already been some discussion about this phenomenon and what to do about it? For the sake of discussion, let’s assume that “notable person” means that there is a Wikipedia article about the person. Let’s also assume that the person is not truly famous – famous in the sense of, for example, George Washington “who slept here.” Has this ground already been plowed? (And if this page is the wrong place to ask the question, what is the right place?) -- Iterator12n Talk 15:10, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

One of the Village pump pages would be a much better place to post this; if nowhere else, try to the miscellaneous one. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:26, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] HOW TO PROGRAM IN JAVA

Please help me programe in java —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.210.31.253 (talk) 00:00, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm just curious - what made you ask that here?? Rocket000 02:59, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Combining "Multidisciplinary" and "Maintenance" into a single subdirectory with a different name

The "Multidisciplinary" subdirectory has a total of three WikiProjects in it. I suggest merging it into the "Maintenance" subdirectory.

One of those three is Wikipedia:WikiProject Update Watch. But, for example, the following WikiProjects, in the "Maintenance" subdirectory, are similarly concerned with all Wikipedia articles:

In short, the split seems artificial, and I suggest eliminating it.

As for the name of the subdirectory, I think "Maintenance" isn't a good choice. Adding illustrations isn't maintenance; doing scientific peer reviews isn't maintenance; adding missing articles isn't maintenance (and those are just three of the six WikiProjects listed above). "Cross-cutting" or "Wikipedia-wide" would be much better titles; perhaps someone else has an even better suggestion. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Professional Wrestling

Why isn't the above in the sports section? Lex94 Talk Contributions Guest Book 21:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Islands project?

I've always been interested in maps, and as a consequence of that I often end up looking at random islands in the middle of nowhere. I've noticed that a lot of these islands don't have articles. Now, there's probably not much to say about most of them, but according to someone on #wikipedia (I forget who exactly) they should be notable as long as they exist. I've already created Cherni Island, but I'm interested in knowing whether there's a WikiProject dedicated to creating, maintaining and improving articles about remote landmasses. Cctoide 14:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Central America

I was looking for Wikipedia:WikiProject Central America, but the geographical breakdown excluded Central America. --Bejnar (talk) 16:47, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Most active WikiProjects

This is just a preliminary listing and brief info gathering of the projects listed in the directory. So far, the BIO WP stands out as a number 1 contender. I ponder writing a bot to follow a list of links to participant sections and parsing the content, but that might just be a waste of time. Can I be Frank? (Talk to me!) 06:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Should I copy this list into the notes field of the directory, instead of this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CanIBeFrank (talk • contribs) 01:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Accessibility problem

According to WP:COLOUR, we should "ensure that colour is not the only way used to convey important information". This directory is a blatant violation- using only color to distinguish between active and inactive wikiprojects. I believe the best course of action would be to add another column to the table, but course it is open for discussion. Thanks, L'Aquatique talk 21:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

It's OK to add a background colour to emphasize active/inactive projects, but the problem is that this shouldn't be the only way to give that information. A solution can be to add another column, or simply write after the name of the project if it is inactive between parenthesis. Best regards, —surueña 12:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Whoops, was I not clear about that? Sorry folks. Now, forgive me, as I'm not an expert in wikimarkup, but it is my understanding that the current code works so that you enter a yes or no for activity and it automatically does the color. Is there a way to alter this code so it would create another column so that we don't have to go through every one and add the column? l'Aquatique talk 03:29, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Actually, this should be pretty easy. The information for each row is in a template, like this:
{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/WikiProject |project = Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada |shortname = Canada |active = yes |assessment = Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/Assessment |peer-review = |collaboration = Wikipedia:Canada collaboration |portal = Canada |notes = |task-force = |listed-in = }}
So all that needs to be done is add an additional row to the table that is created by using this template. Or, to be more precise, to modify the template so that in addition to using the "active=" parameter for coloring, it also creates an additional cell (for the new column) that has the value of this parameter. (And no, I'm not volunteering; I'm not an expert on how a template creates a table.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 18:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Okay, well it shouldn't be that difficult to find someone who is. l'Aquatique talk 20:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Done. Kirill 20:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
It looks great, thanks so much! l'Aquatique talk 01:17, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Latin music

Anybody interested in creating a WikiProject for Latin music with me? I feel that, with some exceptions, Latin music is fairly under-represented on Wikipedia, and could benefit from a lot more attention. Thanks in advance! --Andy (talk) 14:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe that this is not the place for such requests. I should suggest Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals; you can also ask for interested editors in the talk page of WikiProject Music. Waltham, The Duke of 16:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks buddy. It's a little confusing around here! --Andy (talk) 11:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] ESPN magazine representative wishes to work with interested Wikipedans to expand article

(Cross-posted to several relevant wikiprojects)

A representative of ESPN magazine wishes to work with interested Wikipedians to expand the ESPN The Magazine article. If any Wikipedians are interested in this, please leave a note at Talk:ESPN_The_Magazine#ESPN_magazine. Raul654 (talk) 05:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Again, wrong page. Here are discussed changes about the WikiProject Directory. You are probably looking for the Council's talk page. Waltham, The Duke of 18:33, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] list of materials analysis methods

Imho this modest list is a real potential gem if properly dealt with. Many of us in the physical sciences struggle to keep up with the proliferation of scientific techniques, what do they require, what you can do with them, are they a surface technique, what exactly do they measure etc, etc. This is also a considerable and growing educational problem. What techniques to teach? What to do with all the ones you cannot possibly teach? I think wikipedia can be a real help if it concentrates on making such information more readily and easily accessible. Often the beginning is the hardest part. What does this funny acronym stand for the authors talk about? What does it do? Could it be useful in my research?. I wonder if we could not transform this rather rag-tag list (together with others like acronyms in microscopy) into a portal that provides a well structured entry into what is a bewildering maze even to most scientists. It would be useful if the family relationship between techniques would be made clear, e.g. XRD comes as single crystal powder PXRD, small angle SAXS etc. In an alphabetic list that is lost. Another dimension is e.g. all the scanning probe techniques STM,AFM SNOM etc. Again as alphabetical that is lost on first sight. Jcwf (talk) 19:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Disney

Disney's WikiProject should not be under the list of american animation because the wikiproject focused also on the live-action movies and television shows, along with theme parks. If anything it should be under its own little categorie, whereas wikiproject disneyland and wikiproject walt disney world.--Baitt (talk) 05:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

We are preparing a new directory; WikiProjects there can be listed under multiple categories, with the main listing being under the most relevant category and the others directing to that main listing. WikiProjects are rarely relevant to just one category. Waltham, The Duke of 15:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Forensic Entomology Project?

I am not sure if this would be a good topic to create as its own article that is linked to all of the insects in order to emphasize the Forensic Entomology aspect of the life cycles, for wikipedia. I would appreciate any feedback...
Life Cycles of Insects Important in Forensic Entomology
My proposal is:
My group intends to research about the life cycles of the main insects related to forensic entomology. We will cover blow flies, flesh flies, cockroaches, and beetles. We will use two paragraphs to convey the stages of life cycles such as egg, larvae, pupa, and adult for each insect. We will comment on the different metamorphoses of insects and how each cycle is unique to its species. One paragraph will be designated for an introduction and one will be used to conclude our findings.
•Complete metamorphosis in blow flies, flesh flies, and beetles
•Incomplete metamorphosis of cockroaches
•Time of development to occur
•Areas of infestation and development in the human body at life cycle stage

1.) Blow Fly Life Cycle
•Egg •Larvae (3 instars) •Pupae •Adult Fly

2.) Flesh Fly
•Egg (in corpse) •Larvae (Maggots) •Pupae •Adult Fly

3.)Cockroach
•Egg •Nymph •Adult

4.)Beetles
•Egg •Larvae (grub) •Pupae •Adult
Austinh37 (talk) 17:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)AustinH37

I would think a more broadly based project dealing with forensic anthropology as a whole, which to the best of my knowledge doesn't yet exist, might work better, as it could include that information and the other information relevant to the field. John Carter (talk) 17:23, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Errr, where is the directory?

I clicked several promising links on the project page, but none of them is a real directory of our WikiProjects. --Dweller (talk) 15:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Me too! - I looked back over a year of previous versions and there's no directory. Too bad, I could have used it. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Somebody had blanked the links page. Back now. Yomanganitalk 15:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Computer Science Directory

I had a look on the Computer Science directory. Seems to be a bit of a mixed bag. Shouldn't the Microsoft Windows, Macintosh, Linux, Plan 9, Amaiga be under an operating systems Wiki project. C++ and .Net should be in programming languages. I guess its still under development. 80.229.232.253 (talk) 23:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Health Should be reclassified according to the subjects that are taught in medical and paramedical courses and not arbitrarily as HIV and Abortion.sarindam7 (talk) 11:04, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shakespeare?

Would a WikiProject Shakespeare be useful? Anybody interested contact me on my talk page. If I get enough I will start it. Thanks, George D. Watson (Dendodge). (talk) 17:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Call for per review.

Hello everyone, I would kindly ask you to help review the Metamorfoz article, as you are experts in music-related articles, your suggestions and improvements would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. --Teemeah Gül Bahçesi 19:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] can somone create a wikiproject for Sum 41?

i could find about 20 people who would join and contribute to it... LukeTheSpook (talk) 23:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Propose it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. Then, if you get enough interested editors, I'm fairly sure that there would be someone willing to help with the creation. You might consider trying to make it a subproject of Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian music. That way, there wouldn't be quite so much creation of support materials and need to update those materials as things change later. John Carter (talk) 23:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] World Science Festival in New York City

Hi all, I would like to propose the creation of a brief article about the World Science Festival, a science festival to be held annually in New York City, starting in spring 2008. As I work for the Festival, that is obviously not an article I can put into the Mainspace myself due to potential WP:Conflict of interest, but, going by what's suggested in WP:Suggestions for COI compliance for edits, I've created a mock-up version under my User page, namely User:Markus_Poessel/WSF_Sandbox.

As you see, I've tried to keep it short and factual, simply listing what the Festival is about, the institutions and people involved. All information except that for the roster of participants is referenced to external sources (New York Times, New York Sun, Ars Technica). By analogy with what's stated in Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) (analogy as it's an event, not an organization), these external sources also should establish notability.

I'd be glad if somebody would use what I've written to create the article World Science Festival. Mainspace categories being prohibited in User space, that person should also uncomment the two category inclusions I've made, but commented out on the mock-up page. Markus Poessel (talk) 17:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I got confused and posted this to the wrong place – it should very probably go onto the discussion page of WikiProject Science, so I'm moving it there. Markus Poessel (talk) 14:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ITC project

Hi there, can anyone tell me why the ITC Productions wikiproject is listed in a category of its own, with Emmerdale and TUGS - both of which are absolutely nothing at all to do with ITC in any way. ITC was a producer and distributor for television in its own right and doesn't belong with the other two topics which are just tv shows. Howie ☎ 03:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Confused ITC and ITV, sorry about that. Changes will be made as I update the directory, including these. John Carter (talk) 14:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks John, I had a feeling it was something like that! Howie ☎ 19:11, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Culture and Arts topics are a complete mess

As someone has rightly pointed out here, the Culture & Arts section of the "Directory" is a complete mess. The section reads:

  • Culture and the arts
    Games and toys
    Literature and writing
    Music
    Philosophy and religion
    Sports

-No mention of the visual or performing arts, no food and drink, biography, history, broadcasting, cinema - in fact most of our best-covered areas. What a joke! Looking at the detailed listing, these topics appear, but in a bizarre arrangement. Whose bright idea was it to put sculpture under the plastic arts rather than the visual ones, which is certainly where it belongs both logically and in project terms? Comics/anime should be under literature, not the visual arts. And so on. Johnbod (talk) 00:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

It's in the process of being updated. Also, for what it's worth, we are trying to follow the 10 basic categories of the WP:1.0 team. From what I remember, in particular, comics and anime are there generally classified as a visual art, don't ask me why, which is why they are included in that section. But I am working on updating the directory, if rather slowly and with frequent interruptions for other things. Also, many of the specifics you mentioned fall more apparently clearly in one of the other groupings. Food and drink is I believe under "Everyday life" for instance, as none of them deal clearly with what might be called "artistic" food preparation, with the possible exception of Mixed Drinks, which falls more apparently under "Food and Drink". And I think biography is at least a redirect listing under literature. Part of the problem we have is that, basically, with the exception of a few of the hard sciences and a few other topics, everything we deal with could be counted as "cultural" or "artistic", but actually placing everything there would make that category's pages contain basically virtually everything. John Carter (talk) 00:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, no "Everyday Life" heading currently appears on either page, though food & drink would certainly be better there if one did. Anime itself falls under film/broadcasting, but the Project is Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga, and manga are printed comics, belonging under literature. Is there any point to the top page until it is better sorted out? At the moment it will just confuse and mislead people, as it did to the editor I linked to? Johnbod (talk) 00:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
You're right, that page is still in my draft directory at User:John Carter/Directory. Regarding the multiple listings, that was the previous format, with the projects which could demonstrably fall under multiple listings having "white line" entries and links to their main listing. The placement of anime and manga is something I don't understand myself, although I think the manga may be counted as being the more significant part, with the name chosen on the basis of alphabetical order or maybe something else. But, like I said, I am working on it. Right now, I'm substituting the draft pages in one at a time, as I finish them. John Carter (talk) 01:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] recent undo on /Games

Meant to say that WP:WikiProject Dragon Quest is at MfD currently, at WP:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Dragon Quest. Feel free to comment there. --Izno (talk) 02:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I actually had found User:Tristam/WikiProject Dragon Quest, and thought I was removing a userfied project. – ClockworkSoul 05:42, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Eh, something to bring up at the MfD, I think. --Izno (talk) 05:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Communism

Wot no Communism WikiProject ? Machete97 (talk) 11:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)