Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Council

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by FitzColinGerald (talk | contribs) at 09:04, 22 May 2007 (→‎Los Angeles). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcut

Template:WikiProject Council Navigation

This page can be used to gauge support for potential WikiProjects before putting a lot of effort into creating a detailed project page.

Proposing a project
To propose a project, write a brief description (including links to the related Wikipedia articles), and add it along with your name to the list below (in alphabetical order by topic). Some boilerplate you can use:
== Name of project ==

; Description : [description here]

; Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
# [your name here]

; Comments
Expressing interest
If you're interested in any of the projects listed here, simply add your name to the appropriate list and start contributing to the relevant articles.
Creating a project
If your project gains support from 5-10 active Wikipedians, it could probably benefit from the organisation boost of having a proper page. Remove it from this list and follow the instructions for creating new projects.
Requesting a project
There may be cases where you believe that there is a pronounced need for the creation of a project which does not yet exist which you may not personally feel qualified to join. Some examples might be certain countries, disciplines, etc. In the event you are aware of such a situation, please add the relevant name to the list of projects below and see if there are any individuals interested in creating such a project.

Projects

Acoustic Music

Description: This WikiProject will help to create, expand, and complete articles about acoustic music. It will work on articles about artists, bands, songs, albums, EP's, singles, compilations, and tours.

Temporary project page: User:Hmwith/Wikiproject Acoustic Music

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

  1. hmwithtalk
  2. Swannie 01:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)-good idea for a wikiproject![reply]



Comments:

Activists

Description
This project will help assemble and maintain a detailed database of political, religious and social activists. It will work to insure that the biographies avoid any POV, adhere to the guidelines for biographies and make certain that the integrity of the subject is preserved.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Ozgod
Comments

Admin Nomination project

Description
In Wikipedia, there are a significant number of editors who wish to apply for adminship but whom do not want to self-nominate. This project aims to allow these individuals to list themselves in an orderly fashion so that others can nominate them.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Nathanww 17:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Zucchini Marie → Complain here Please sign! 00:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Eskimospy 23:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • I fail to see how wikipedia would benefit from having such a list. If one wishes to find a "sponsor" for nomination, I think simply requesting an editor review and indicating that you are considering becoming an admin should be enough to hopefully get someone to agree to nominate one. Also, this does, at least at present, look suspiciously like soliciting for approval, which could be counterproductive. We could have a case where people nominate simply on the basis on the list, which basically takes away the purpose of having a nominator, which is having someone familiar with the subject and his/her activity who can dispassionately indicate that they believe the candidate has, as it were, "measured up." I realize I could be wrong on some of these points, and would welcome responses to them. John Carter 00:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • That.. seems kind of silly. If you put yourself on the list you are basically nominating yourself, but with a slower process. -- Ned Scott 03:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Admin coaching seems to be where people seeking to become sysops should go. Additionally, you could probably expect significant opposition at RfA. You may wish to raise the issue on the RfA talk page to see what kind of response you might get from such a project. Vassyana 00:18, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Oversight Board

Description - To try to determine if it is feasible to create a board of administrators and non-administrators, possibly with wikipedia bureaucrats and staff as well, which could act in a judicial capacity to review behavior of administrators, specifically regarding the propriety of their actions, and how such a board could be specifically constituted. The existence of such a board composed of respected non-administrators and administrators alike may be sufficient to forestall questioning of whether a decision made by it is truly fair and independent, as opposed to being a group of administrators who might be seen as acting to reduce the possibility of being sanctioned for similar actions of their own. It also might be sufficient to preempt the possibility of disaffected editors from going so far as to bring civil complaints against wikipedia as an entity or against individual administrators in particular.

Temporary Project Page: User:Badbilltucker/Admin Oversight Board

Interested wikipedians (please add your name below):

Comments:

  • You might want to get some more feedback about this, even if others gain interest in the project. Maybe a note about this idea should be left on WP:AN? -- Ned Scott 10:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ermm, sounds burocratic to me. -- Selmo (talk) 21:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sounds more like warmongering to me. "Warn me again, and I'll drag you in front of the Oversight committee!" --InShaneee 22:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Actually, I thought of it as more of the opposite. I personally imagine that most of the complaints would be dismissed summarily for lack of evidence or for perhaps small criticism of the admin in question (maybe for using a remotely potentially insulting phrase, for instance), but the simple fact of having an independent body doing so would, I hope, eliminate the number of complaints about admin collusion and suchlike. Much like the average police board, it might investigate a lot of complaints, but in almost all cases they find that there has been no real abuse of power. Also, I don't think that it would necessarily have any real authority, other than that given it by the community as a whole. However, the mere presence of the body and the rebukes it would offer over time would I think be enough to prove that it is independent, and thus hopefully avoid complainants indulging in other procedures, like lawsuits (as has been mentioned before by others), defamation of the admin in question, etc. etc. etc. Badbilltucker 02:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • First of all, I can garentee you that the second this is created, there will be accusations that it's run by 'the cabal'. Secondly, this smacks of a judicial system. Regardless of what power it may or may not be given at creation, you're asking it's members to weigh judgement on other admins. We do have processes to determine this, and simply put, we need less lawyering around here, not more. --InShaneee 16:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • No disagreement to the last point. As stated above, the primary purpose of the group would be to create a body which by its existence would serve to help keep real lawyers and lawsuits getting involved in wikipedia's actions. Badbilltucker 16:23, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
          • That's what OFFICE does, though. --InShaneee 00:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
            • Actually, that restricts itself only to content. The possibility of a disgruntled editor who has been banned and later files a legal action based on that ban has been raised more than once, and in the event that any admin were named as a defendant in such a lawsuit even once, and has to hire council to defend his/her actions, I think there is a very real chance of total chaos erupting. That is what this proposal is trying to prevent ever happening. Badbilltucker 00:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who currently does "oversight" for the admin? What made you want to create this, have you seen an admin that needed oversight? YaanchSpeak! 23:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Before an action like this is taken I'd like to see that there is a real need for this. Most of the complaints against me as an admin are from those with no concept of copyright... and if this is the case for most admins then I see this board as getting tired of stupid listening to silly cases repeatedly. When people feel the need they take it up at WP:AN. Are you arguing that this isn't enough? That being said, I don't know how other admins act... but I try to keep my debating a topic completely separate from admin duties. gren グレン 16:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see the point. We already have mechanisms for this, ranging from RfC to AN to DR to mediation to ArbCom, depending on the context and the serverity of the dispute. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 17:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I would suggest that this be changed to an advisory and information-seeking board. Like SMcCandish, I do not want to add to the number of overlapping jurisdictions, and I think the general WP feeling is against doing so. But there could well be a less formal channel, in essence a special variant of AN. I see this project as not primarily serving as a place for complaints, but asa pace for collecting information on a routine and ongoing basis, possible programmatically. As for legal issues, I think the existing WP:OFFICE structure is suffficient. DGG 01:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The editor who created the page above seems to be inactive. If I might rephrase the possible set-up, I think it might make sense if this were to function as a form of "evidence gathering" group which might try to find evidence for any administrator abuse of the system which a given party thinks might have been overlooked. I can see it being useful under such conditions. One, if they were to find evidence which had been overlooked which they thought might be considered significant, they could present it to the community as a whole through some procedure for possible future action. Secondly, if they fairly carefully went over the case presented and found insufficient evidence to substantiate any real misconduct on the part of the admin in question and explicitly stated as much, it might help prevent the possibility of nuisance legal action. Most attorneys, after all, will not take a case if there is no hard evidence to support it, and if this group goes over a case and finds no sufficiently "damning" evidence to support a case, then it is that much less likely that the complaint would result in a pointlesss legal action which might potentially get negative press for wikipedia. I think the probability of some such nuisance lawsuit arising, unfortunately, is fairly good, and on that basis don't favor removing this proposed project from the list, even if I do not believe I would necessarily participate in it. John Carter 15:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Considering we already have a mediation committee and arbitration committee, why not make it a reviwing board. The Project could examine and review the progress of admin, and decide if they were still worthy to be admins. Then if the consensus was that he or she was unworthy the Admin could be brought before a beaucrat, and there would be a vote on whether or not the admin should remain admin. If that is to much, why not just have a ranking of the quality of admins by consensus. --Random Say it here! 20:53, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Airsoft

Description
The purpose of an Airsoft WikiProject would be to clean up exsisting airsoft articles and then expand the scope to specific manufacturers and upgrading airsoft guns.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. The Pelican 15:56, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Keith.douglas 00:17, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Alphawiki

Description-This project is both an article building project and a community building project. I have an ambition. To help build a wiki, greater than any other. To help shape the community into the ultimate pride in editing, and such. This project can help make wikipedia elite. The idea of the Alphawiki project is to keep check on the community, and its editors. The first point being an awards scheme. To give all the best editors barnstars. Because there are many editors who work hard all the time and never get noticed. Whilst having its own IRC channel, and it teachers wikipedians to take pride and glory in editing; to hopefully help form articles, stubs, add references and such; and the main aim, is to transform wikipedia into the largest most accurate source of information in the world. Eaomatrix 19:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The basic goal of Alphawiki though is to help build a happy and prideful community, whilst doing helpful maintainence and backlog work and improving articles through reference additions, cleanup, removal of copyright violations, whilst expanding articles. Also reconising editors and giving barnstars to hardworking contributors.

Aims and goals
  • Help out on editor review.
  • Help build userboxes, and userpages, help users to assume good faith.
  • A coaching area for all editors, to help improve wiki and sort out its problems.
  • Create a new IRC experience.
  • Help list references for thousands of articles and help promote them to GA and FA
  • To build an established united community, where people take pride in editing.
  • Constant updates to the defcon and other facilities, keep wikipedia under check.
  • Helping out on backlogs. Categories, and such.
  • To reconise all editors and award barnstars to them.
  • To teach wikipedians to have pride in editing, so we can make wikipedia something we can be proud of.
  • To also make wiki Fun (Aswell as having a WP:FUN)

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

Comments

  • I have no specific objections to the proposal per se, because it so far completely lacks any specifics. It would greatly benefit from having indications of specific procedures and goals. John Carter 20:30, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I've been bored ever since Esperanza... Oh. Wait. This is kinda like that, isn't it? Scalene•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography style="color:#00F;">Є• 09:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not like esperanza. Because this one is more focused towards article building; but I would like Esperanza back. Eaomatrix 12:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject:Appreciation

Description
This is a proposal for a WikiProject in which is similar to the random smiley award but it is not random award, it's main purpose would be to recognise peoples contributions to our encyclopedia, no matter how many or how minor they are, as-well as to make wikipedians know that all of the contributions are greatly appreciated and therefore creating optimism on wikipedia and encouraging further contributions. If there were enough active members I'd be willing to create templates for members to distribute onto other users' talk pages just saying about the project and thanks for their contributions. I'd be willing to help on this myself and create the project page etc and hopefully make it a success with many members.Tellyaddict 15:45, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary project page
User:Greeves/WikiProject User appreciation
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Greeves (talk • contribs)
  2. Jerry_lavoie (talk • contribs • count)
Comments

Australian literature

Description
This project would aim to improve the quality, coverage and accessibility of all articles relating to Australian literature. It's parentage is WP Australia and WP Literature. Currently this area is in such a state that it even got a mention in the mainstream press. (The Australian, Oct 14, 2006) A significant proportion of related articles are stubs, many have not been categorised as "Australian", and the quality overall is extremely low. This project would :
  • categorise relevant articles so they can be easily accessed for assessment and cleanup
  • provide guidelines and recommendations for related articles
  • work with sister projects and workgroups such as WP Biography/Arts and entertainment and Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels, utilising their resources, such as templates and infoboxes, to improve article structure
  • identify any coverage gaps in core areas
  • provide a central discussion area for interested editors
Proposed project page
Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian literature
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. User:Baby ifritah
  2. User:Littlepilgrim1
  3. User:Boylo
Comments
  • I wonder a more general arts/culture project would offer better support for work on Australian literature. It would certainly save having to establish several other small projects on, say, music or visual art etc.--cj | talk 15:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
this was considered. i was hoping to keep it to a manageable scale because there is a lot of remedial work that needs to be done. literature itself covers a wide range of subjects which i can envisage becoming separate task forces. also, imo, the types of articles and the knowledge base for other "arts" categories are very different. i was hoping that this would be a good balance between too broad and too limited but i look forward to everyone's opinions. xx baby_ifritah 15:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Music

Description
There's a massive amount of music from Australia and much of it is very distinct and unique in flavour and style to Australia only. Much of WP:MUSTARD and WP:AUSTRALIA doesn't eclipse and doesn't really take into consideration this massive part of Australia's culture.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. lincalinca 07:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. User:SatuSuro
  3. User:Thuringowacityrep
Temporary project page
User:Lincalinca/WikiProject Australian Music
Proposed page
WP:AUSMUS
Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Music
Comments

My main question is, what's the scope? Are we talking "Mental as Anything", or "Waltzing Mathilda"? My thought is that we'd probably be better off with a task force or two, with Mental as Anything being the "Australian Rock" task force of Wikipedia:WikiProject Rock music, and "Waltzing Mathilda" being the "Australian Western world music" (as opposed to "Australian Indigenous world music") task force of Wikipedia:WikiProject World music. -- TimNelson 02:02, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The issue about scope - It needs to start - and if there is a tie in for all Australian music categories - there might down the track be a need for subsidiary projects dependsing on a arnage of issues - however to tie in current categories would be a good idea. I am not a fan of task forcees - I would see what support is there first - try just the one project- and seee if it can dance or whether it will sink.... SatuSuro 02:17, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does that mean that your intention is to include both of the categories I mentioned in the scope?
  • What's wrong with task forces?
-- TimNelson 11:05, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Banners

Description
A WikiProject to set standards for, and help projects with, WikiProject banners.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Miketm 10:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Agathoclea 15:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Wouldn't this be something that the Council could assist with? I would help out with this new WikiProject if it was formed but I don't know if a Project with such a narrow focus is needed.↔NMajdan•talk 16:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, this seems like something that could be better done directly through the Council; we probably don't need more "meta-WikiProjects" at this stage. Kirill Lokshin 18:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Setting this up as a specific task for Council would probably be more efficient. -- Ned Scott 18:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't think it's up to anyone but the projects to design, make, and handle their own banners. Any effort by the Council to manage the banners would have to be approved by all the projects, IMO. --MPD T / C 21:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I was under the impression that this was intended as an effort to help projects with the technical aspects of banners, not an attempt to control them. (FWIW, I don't like the latter idea either.) Kirill Lokshin 21:53, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • The word "standards" in the description brings up thoughts of cookie-cutter banners. Technical aspects and help is perfectly fine and would be appreciated, I'm sure. Perhaps then, it could be a sub-project of the Council, rather than its own project. I define banners as the template at the top of a page...so it could be broadened to be a more "Templates" sub-project, which would help with all templates needed by a project(unless that's what's implied and I'm not on the same page). Just to clarify. :) --MPD T / C 22:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • When I say standards I'm talking about a naming convention, a starter template that projects can expand and customize and things like that. This project would not tell projects what there banners should look like, or how they should work, but how they can improve and make them work more effectively.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 02:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • In reply to Kirill, seeing as how unchecked wikiproject template spamming has now reached levels where it is starting to noticeably degrade the usability of talk pages, I think some measure of control/regulation is necessary. However, it is inappropriate for the wikiproject council to define those standards. As the TFD nomination has shown, the wikiproject council and its members have an obvious bias in favor of wikiprojects, and against what is in the best interests of the average reader and contributor (who are not wikiproject members). Or, as I previously noted, the NRA should not be writing gun control legislation. Raul654 15:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • There are some bold asseertions here. If this were an article I would definitely tag Raul's statement with {{fact}}. I'd like to see any evidence Raul can provide to back up the claim that "the wikiproject council and its members have an obvious bias...against waht is in the best interests of the average reader and contributor". I think that is a scandalous claim. Force10 15:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nice to see that AGF is alive and well these days. Kirill Lokshin 15:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's not their good faith I doubt - I don't doubt that they mean well. It's the fact that they have an insurmountable conflict of interest. Already, there's at least one bot wikiproject-tagging hundreds of articles per day, and the best solution the wikiproject council has come up with to date is the small=yes non-solution. The *last* thing I want is the wikproject council forming some sort of banners meta-project with airs of authority, setting "standards" which obviously favor its own interests (that is, many large and obtrusive banners which are displayed by default) above the interests of the community at large (which prefers small, uncluttered talk pages). Raul654 16:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Insurmountable conflict of interest indeed! It's not like Council members had any role in developing {{WikiProjectBanners}} or anything like that. I would have thought that our sincerity, at least, would not be in doubt; but it seems that I was mistaken. C'est la vie, as it were. Kirill Lokshin 16:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • I would only note to the above editor that the person to whom he seemingly directly addressed the above comment created the User:Kirill Lokshin/Sandbox/Template14 template, which if used would probably do more to decrease clutter than just about anything else I've seen to date. John Carter 16:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
          • "which if used would probably do more to decrease clutter than just about anything else I've seen to date." - then I guess you haven't seen Template:WikiProjectBanners, which ((unlike the above) is already deployed and used on 600-or-so articles. Raul654 16:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
            • No, actually, I have seen it, as is evidenced by my comment here. The template above referenced by me goes a step further, though, and actually displays the projects' names, something the example you cited does not do, and, at least potentially, decreases the need for interested parties to ever have to see the specific banners, and could, at least potentially, replace them in some cases somewhere down the road. John Carter 16:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Um... would WikiProject Banners have a banner? *head asplodes* No, seriously, I don't think this is a good idea. Not even a good idea for the Council, either. This should be done in the Village Pump. Titoxd(?!?) 23:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think we should have this at all. It is not fair for one WikiProject to have authority over how other WikiProjects use banners. Johntex\talk 15:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like this idea if and only if one of the goals of the project (besides regulating banner styles and whatnot) would be to assist WikiProjects in specializing their banners (with the complicated code most of us haven't learned) to best meet the needs of each project. I know my project could benefit from someone with technical expertise. KSchutte 22:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is needed, but it should be a Council task force. There's no reason to create a new project about this, from my point of view. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 17:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC) PS: I agree a bit with the concerns about control; "setting standards" can be interpreted more than one way. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 17:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • i think that there shouldn't be a separate wikiproject, but a task force would be good, not for regulation but for guidance and help with coding. baby_ifritah 00:33, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • It sounds to me like the consensus is that we need to expand on Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/Technical notes. This could be called a "Topic Co-ordination" (this is even smaller than a task force). In fact, we could read the section I wrote a few hours ago about Topic Co-ordination, and put that to the test. -- TimNelson 02:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Belarus

Description
This project would aim to clean up and collect articles related to Belarus, with a minimum of conflict, like the stated goals at the Law Enforcement WikiProject. This is a thorny area, but there are projects for hotspots like Sudan and Iraq, so we can accomplish this if there are dedicated folks of all stripes willing to work together.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Chris 05:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. John Carter 14:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC) = Not necessarily the best informed person on the subject, but I'm generally good with at least biographies.[reply]
  3. Teh Ferret 22:25, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments


Business people

Description
This proposed project would deal specifically with biographies of people in the field of business and commerce.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 16:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Ukrained 10:31, 20 May 2007 (UTC) , interested mainly in developing biographies of the post-Soviet businessmen.[reply]
Comments
  • Exactly, this proposed project could be a subproject to WikiProject Business and Economics as well. A task force in either mentioned Wikiproject would also be great. Ukrained 10:31, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

California Schools

Description: I have noticed that schools, particularly in Central California, have aging information, disorganized articles, or just plain nothing. There needs to be a foundation to standardize these articles, and make sure that there is adequate information for each one. There would be seperate groups (within the Cal School WikiProject) dealing with different counties and general areas.

Interested Wikipedians:

  1. Wikimania1011

Comments:
I feel this is a waste of wikipedia. As my friend often says, Wikipedia is NOT about schools, its about information. Anyway, schools are boring. I should know, i spent years in them. Regards, Zesty Prospect 09:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Zesty Prospect,

With all due respect, no one cares about your obvious hate for schools and education... some of us do care about keeping Wikipedia the best Internet information site ever by creating new articles and updating old ones.

Cantopop Music

Description
My Wikiproject is based on information on Cantonese Music. (See Cantopop) This WikiProject includes information of Hong Kong singers, songs, and albums. This WikiProject would help Wikipedia by adding more information, and improving stub articles about Hong Kong's cantopop music.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Stephy100
  2. Smcafirst
Comments (Any questions? I would be glad to answer them.)
  • Is this WikiProject necessary? Express your opinion?

A:Yes,it will give more information on cantopop music and it will sure make people understand about cantopop music,it will also help Wikipedia because we will make more articles and improve the stubs.

  • How are you going to improve the stubs?

A:we will research on more in formation on the topic and extend the article to improve it.

  • How big is your coverage of this WikiProject? Does it extend to as far as 1930s, to the early developement? If not, this WikiProject, to me, would be seemed pointless, as the developement of Cantopop in the early ages is important.

A:My Wikiproject's coverage includes music of Hong Kong Singers and albums and chinese songs.We will include 1930's music,the history of Chinese songs and the development of music.we will include topics like singers,songs,albums,history of music and the music of long ago.To accomplish our goal,we need your help to work on this.

  • Wouldn't it be a better idea to expand it to Project Chinese Pop? That way you snag the Mandopop fans as well, which would get you more support for the project.

Charmed

Description
to maintain and improve quality on all Charmed related articles. Similar to WP:BUFFY
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 20:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Maelwys 20:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. -- Huntster T • @ • C 23:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. NeilEvans 17:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Think outside the box 13:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Killswitch Engage 05:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 00:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chemical compounds and mixtures

Description
So far as I can determine, there is no extant WikiProject which deals explicitly with chemical compounds and mixtures. This includes articles of substantial importance to wikipedia, such as Alloy, Brass, Bronze, Glass, Salt, and Steel. This proposed project would concern itself with the creation, maintenance, and improvement of articles of this type.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 20:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. – AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs color="blue">+sign here+How's my editing?) 01:44, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • I think this greatly overlaps with the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals. --Itub 08:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, I do too. I just noticed that the articles I mentioned, as well as several others, are articles which that project hasn't yet tagged, so I assumed that they were not considered within the scope of that project. If it were to be argued that this might function as a task force of that project, or that's project's scope expanded to formally include these articles, I personally would have no reservations. John Carter 14:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've posted a comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals#Similar_project_proposed to see what the members of the project think. As I said there, I think WikiProject Chemicals covers the "simple" compounds pretty well, but I'm not sure about the mixtures. Most of the examples you give could also be considered materials, rather than "chemicals" (but there is no WikiProject Materials as far as I know). --Itub 15:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I also think that this project would be better handled by the chemicals project and a materials project. I would think that there could be significant cross pollination between them as well. Metallurgy might also be a relevant project with overlap with materials. I just think the scope is better broken up such that individuals can decide on what parts of a hypothetical super-project they would like to be involved in by joining as many as they would like and cross posting when appropriate..--Nick Y. 21:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Liturgy

Description
Another attempt to diffuse the number of articles potentially covered by WikiProject Christianity. In particular, this WikiProject would cover articles relating to Christian liturgy: articles about rites, liturgical calendars/holidays, vestments/paraments, and anything else covered by the topic of Liturgy.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Pastor David
  2. John Carter
  3. [your name here]
Comments
As I have given thought to this since first posting it, perhaps this would work best as a taskforce of WP:X, and maybe also being related to WikiProject Holidays? In the next few days, I will post questions about this on the relevent talk pages to see if any interest might be garnered. Pastor David † (Review) 18:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree with the task force idea. -- TimNelson 02:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cold War History

Description
A project to foster better coordination and collaboration on articles relating to Cold War history.
Temporary Project Page

User:Warlordjohncarter/WikiProject Cold War history

Interested Wikipedians
  1. Nobs02 21:52, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  2. RedSpruce 22:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC) (not currently interested)[reply]
  3. Eleland 13:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Jimbo Herndan 04:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. A mcmurray 09:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Destructo 087 22:34, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Chris 04:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC) let's jumpstart this bad boy[reply]
  8. Crested Penguin 08:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Rucha58 15:50, 20, May 2007 (UTC)
Comments
  • Task force, project it doesn't really matter. Something like this is broad enough to merit a project. I can set it up but I can't guarantee it will be fast as I am about to take an article to FAC and will be wrapped up with that for a bit. I will probably just borrow some ideas from the Ghost towns project which I also set up, though it hasn't seen nearly as much activity as I think this project will. I will get back to you on this when I have something substantial in my user space. IvoShandor 06:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to create at least an early draft project page by the end of the day. I want to make it clear, however, that anyone interested in doing so is more than welcome to make any appropriate changes to it once it is made. John Carter 14:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So we keep this project up here? Crested Penguin 09:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's someone else's call. You might wait for the formal ten members, or someone might (I can't stop them) create the project formally by moving the proposed project page and/or creating an alternate one. John Carter 18:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comedians (suggested expansion as Comedy)

Description: This would be a specific type of Biography project, specifically for working with comedians, living and dead, from all countries, etc. This would not include things such as sketch groups or comedy clubs, etc...

User: --Twintone 16:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name):

Comments: There's just something funny about this category I can't quite put my finger on.... 8^) NDCompuGeek 02:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note also similar project at Wikipedia:WikiProject Owarai Chris 02:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not a project for "Comedy" as a whole, incorporating comedians, comic works, etc? ...adam... • talk 23:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with adam. Who's Sacha Baron Cohen without Borat? --wpktsfs 04:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's a better idea. A much broader topic. All comedians, comic actors, sitcoms, sketch shows other show primarily diesgined to be funny, comedy films, comedy catchphrases and notable sketches, prominent comedy writers and anything else there is. Either way its a good idea for a project. Gran2 18:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comics creators

Description
This proposed project or work group would try to ensure that articles relating to creators of individual comic book, strips and other media are created, improved, and maintained.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Comments

Companies

Description
Potentially a sub-project / task force to WikiProject Business & Economics, this would work on improving the consistency & quality of articles on companies. I know there are these guidelines but they are difficult to find and, based upon the articles I have seen, rarely enforced except for the biggest cases. I think it is also telling, given the importance of companies in todays world, that there is only one featured article and a handful of good articles.

Specific goals of this project / task force would be:

  1. Look to ensure that articles are created for all notable companies
  2. Ensuring all company articles are tagged for quality / importance
  3. Ensuring all company articles use the company infobox
  4. Expand upon the current guidelines and promote their use
  5. Drive to improve articles so that more become Good & Featured

Scope would be all notable for-profit companies globally, whether public or private, and their predecessors.

To be honest, I'm surprised there isn't something like this already! :-)

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Richc80 13:48, 13 May 2007 (UTC) - as proposer[reply]
  2. Ukrained 09:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • I see the new project only as part of the larger WikiProject Business & Economics where we could additionally discuss and verify our terms, criteria and classification schemes for companies
  • One more proposed goal: Ensuring proper categorization, listing and content/context distribution for company articles
  • Regarding the scope: ...including companies , highly important for economic and sociopolitical life of certain countries Ukrained 09:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confidence Tricks

Description
Currently, there are a stack of articles discussing confidence tricks & artists - from Advance Fee Fraud to Soapy Smith, Hustling to Shill. They have a huge amount of problems that will take time to fix, however. Talk pages are commonly used to discuss the subject, and there is a great deal of cleanup that would be required, such trying to control the amount of people who discuss confidence tricks on talk pages, to trying to make all pages as informative as possible to prevent victims, while still keep the articles encyclopedic. It's bigger than WP:LAW, and deals with issues that are outside it's scope.
User
Scalene•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography•Є• 08:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Scalene•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography•Є• 08:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Diletante
Temporary Page
User:Scalene/Confidence_Tricks
Comments

Cosmetics

Description: To improve information on cosmetics, especially from the points of view of history, industry, biography and science. To remove the advertorial copy that affects many cosmetic industry articles at present, create NPOV, and add citations. To ensure a fuller context for cosmetics articles, linking to issues including feminism, culture, animal welfare, religion, social history, medical ethics and so on.

User: TinaSparkle 14:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary project page: available at my user page.

Interested Wikipedians: (please add your name)

Comments: How do we protect against advertorial vandalism? Bobzchemist 19:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that's where we chemists come in, isn't it?--Sam195 13:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and we copyeditors too! I think diligence and a sharp eye are the best lines of defence, unless anyone has the skills to write a super cosmetics anti-vandalism bot. -- TinaSparkle 15:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Now that there is Wikipedia:WikiProject Fashion, consider a collaboration. Chris 00:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Within that project, I have suggested the creation of many separate task forces or working groups, and I think this would come under Beauty (which would allow it to include hair, skin and nail content as well). Daniel Case 17:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Costa Rica

Description: This is a proposal for a project aiming to the improving and expanding of Costa Rica-related articles. Articles such as List of schools in Costa Rica and Battle of Rivas (which are extremely important to understand Costa Rica's history and social structure) are left in a permanent stub condition and left with none or vague info. Other institutions, such as Saint Mary High School, have taken of Wikipedia's lack of information about Costa Rica to set up personal web pages or biased articles about themselves. This project would aim to improve and radically change this articles until they are in a professional and unbiased format.

User: Bernalj90 18:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary project page: User:Bernalj90/WikiProject Costa Rica

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name):

  1. Badbilltucker - will try to help as much as I can, which, regretably, may not be much.
  2. Darwinek - created many stubs about geography in the past, still many to write ... - Darwinek 14:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. VanTucky
  4. Friendly1013

Comments:

Cruise Ships

Description
This project seeks to organize all articles pertaining to cruising in a decent manner. There are many articles in wikipedia regarding cruising and cruise ships. This project also seeks to further develop the smaller articles as well as maintain the fully developed ones.
User
mmerali
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Comments
  • Create it.

DaimlerChrysler

Description
This project will cover all branches and cars associated with DaimlerChrysler. The Chrysler area on Wikipedia is large, so it would be useful to organize it. Some important aspects would include Mercedes Benz, Chrysler, Plymouth, and Dodge.
User
JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 02:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

HaLoGuY007

Comments
Maybe let Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles make this as subproject, and hope that some drastic happens shortly. And great to see you back, NDCompuGeek! Hope you were feeling better before you found out about the Subaru thing. John Carter 20:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, why is the Subaru thing bad? Chris 23:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Database

Description
This project will cover all aspects of databases, including (but not limited to) logical design methodologies, query languages, storage systems, physical design, administration, and security. The information currently available on Wikipedia concerning this important, far-reaching, topic requires the talents of all available subject-matter experts, writers, editors, and those with organizational skills. I propose that the goals of this project should be (in this order):
    • To improve the quality of subject-matter content by providing verifiable, accurate, and complete subject matter information;
    • To make the content accessible to a wide audience; and
    • To provide a better organization and support for the articles that fall within the scope of this project.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. SqlPac 16:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

De-abstraction of Mathematics Articles

Description: This is a proposal to make articles on mathematical concepts more accessible to a general audience through the use of analogies, diagrams, and examples.

Temporary project page: User:Mistercow/De-abstraction of Mathematics Articles

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name): Linus M. I personally think that this project would be excellent. Ketsuekigata Comments:

Derbyshire

Description
I would like to set up my own project for the english county of Derbyshire. There is a similar one for Cheshire, here [[2]]].
Interested Wikipedians
  1. AxG (talk) (guest book)
  2. Erebus555 (talk · contribs)
  3.  DDStretch  (talk) 18:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Victuallers 13:00, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments There are similar projects for other counties such as Cornwall and Cheshire and feel that one for Derbyshire would be neccesary. I have been living in the county all my life and so =have the other interested wikipedians. We are all experianced wikipedians and we are all knowledgeable of the area and I am sure the project would work. JFBurton 14:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Digital libraries

Description
A WikiProject aiming to tag all pages here and facilitate collaboration on them.
Interested Wikipedians
  1. Blast 07.04.07 0615 (UTC)
Comments

Dilbert

Description
[description here]
Interested Wikipedians
  1. Umpajug (talk · contribs)
Comments

I'm guessing this is about Dilbert. Would the proposer be interested in maybe contacting Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics to set up as a subproject? I think that group is already familiar with most of the media involved, and it might make the talk page less busy. It also would probably mean less administrative work for the members of this project itself. John Carter 21:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dinotopia

Description
There are wikiprojects for many book series, such as harry potter or lord of the rings. Since this series has about 20 books, and many potential pages to work on. I have already started one new page: Code of Dinotopia. There are many others that can be worked on, such as Skybax, individual characters, places, species, and more. Unfourtuneately, the main place to find info is from the books themselves, so go to your local library if you want to source info for this proposed project. So, what do you think? The main goal of this project would be to create new articles for the series, to promote at least a few articles to good status, and to improve wikipedia's coverage of the series. I mean, come on, wikipedia has coverage of so many other series, why not this one? I typed in the wikiproject's name, so I assume it does not currently exist. There's only about one or two or three articles about this series. Other wikiprojects about book series such as Harry Potter, have like, what, several dozen articles? So, it is now this project's goal, still proposed, to expand wikipedia's coverage of this series. I mean, there's very little reason why this series is not at least nearly as widely known as many other series. If you are reading this and worked on the original article, you might be interested. If you've ever read any of the series and are reading this, you might be interested. So, come on, we, or I, have already created one article, and at least one redirect, which could easily be an article. In fact, someone has already suggested that the redirect become an article. So, it's up to you, to help improve this topic. Sorry if I'm being repeatetive. So, anybody interested? Thanks. – AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs color="blue">+sign here+How's my editing?) 01:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. – AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs
Comments

The temporary homepage of this wikiproject is here

Engineering

Description
A Wikiproject Centering on engineering with a deep base in mathematics and physics, and linked to the Engineering portal. This project would expand engineering knowledge.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Molinogi (talk · contribs)
  2. Ageo020 (talk · contribs)
  3. p27182 (talk · contribs)
Comments ; (Feel free to add any comments)

Entourage

Description: The project will aim to improve the quality and quantity of Entourage related articles, and decide and implement uniform editing guidelines on pages related to Entourage.

Temporary project page: User:Argash/WikiProject Entourage

User: Argash

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name): Also add you name to the members list on the temporary project page.

  1. Sven Erixon (talk · contribs)
  2. Davey4 (talk · contribs)
  3. LoyolaDude (talk · contribs)
  4. Grahamdubya (talk · contribs)
Comments

If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 00:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any TV Series WikiProject?. --HybridBoy 06:38, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Football (soccer) in the United States of America and Canada

Please offer suggestions for a better name (preferably shorter.) The scope of the project includes improvement of all the soccer leauges, such as the MLS and USL, in Canada and the USA. Also included would be their national teams. The project would also develope articles on players, coaches, and other influencial figures in the game. XYZ CrVo 02:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

D. BULL 12:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments Feel free to leave any comments
  • I agree with the name suggestion. I'm not clear on the structure of WikiProjects - when a subProject is better, when it should be its own thing, etc., so I'll defer to the experts on that. Bill Oaf 13:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • You don't want to say "the USA and Canada"; see guidelines at Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Acronyms and abbreviations: "When including the United States in a list of countries, do not abbreviate the “United States” (for example, “France and the United States”, not “France and the U.S.”)." I'm good with North America which you can easily defines as the United States and Canada. Existing articles on soccer specific to the United States and Canada use "soccer" rather than "football" and I think that is consistent with Wikipedia principles regarding spelling and usage, but that is certainly a good topic for discussion if we had a project page. Canadiana 15:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Wikiproject North American Soccer would definately be the best name. --wpktsfs 02:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would add a section about female football and competitions in Northamerica. --HybridBoy 06:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frasier

Description
The project's goal is to improve the main article Frasier, and to create new articles for the episode list and also to expand the characters articles.
Temporary User page
User:Bernstein2291/Wikiproject Frasier
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Ageo020 18th March 2007
  2. Bernstein2291 20th March 2007
Comments

If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 00:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it is that narrow. Remember Frasier has over 264 episodes and there are no articles for half of them. There are Wikiprojects for the Simpsons as well as Fawlty Towers which just has 12 episodes.--Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 22:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Future

Description
This WikiProject will mostly be aimed toward articles on inventions and society of the future. Articles on multiple futuristic inventions will be included. Articles on futuristic society will also be included...What will cars be like? What will the clothing be like? What will the people be like? Are there robots? Basically, this WikiProject is about the future.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

Proposer of WikiProject: Swannie 02:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--HybridBoy 06:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • This sounds remarkably like and attempt at WikiProject Crystal-ball. Too much speculation involved. Pastordavid 18:16, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Create it, with prolongation of date obtained from the present. There is a lot of articles about "the future of..." and we can include researches in the field of study. I like the invention idea, but not the society part. --HybridBoy 06:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think that the proposal some merit, but that it would have to be very careful regarding what it covers and says. Speculation about "the future of abortion", for example, even if it is exrtremely well documented, is likely to cause endless battles over what should and shouldn't be included. Having said that, information on the future of technology (and possibly the future of the planet, the universe, maybe even evolution) would generally meet less resistance. John Carter 19:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Galápagos Islands

Ultimately, with or without the á, this is a project I wanted to start a long time ago, and never got around to. Although WP:ECU already exists, I think there is sufficient content unique to the Galápagos to warrant a separate WikiProject.

Project page (proposed, would be)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Galapagos or Wikipedia:WikiProject Galápagos Islands — Input welcome here—the format for which I borrowed quite heavily from WP:WPWI.  :-p

Scope

To include all articles related to the Galápagos Islands, e.g, Geology, History (human), Biology, etc.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Proposer :-) Tomertalk 02:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments. Please sign your comments with 4 tildes (~~~~)
Get a task force from Wikiproject Ecuador. Teh Ferret 22:26, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. --HybridBoy 07:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Global Democracy

With the human rights portal in place, discussing human rights around the world, it seems right that there be a similar portal for democracy (or lack of). The voting rights or suffrage of every country on Earth could be profiled, with a chronological history of the spread of democracy. I'm relatively new here so technical help would be especially appreciated. Thoughts?

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Josh
  2. Crested Penguin 07:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --HybridBoy 07:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Grunge & Alternative

Description: This WikiProject will help to create, expand, and complete articles about grunge and alternative music. It will create articles for songs, albums, or artists/bands that fall under grunge or alternative. It will serve to help keep the music section of Wikipedia up-to-date and user-friendly.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

Comments:

How would this project be different from Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music, which already exists? John Carter 18:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you would explain the differences, if they exist. --HybridBoy 07:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guster

Description: This WikiProject will help to create, expand, and complete articles about Guster and their music, as well as related articles. It will work on articles about Guster's songs, EP's, compilations, members, and tours.

Temporary project page: User:Hmwith/Wikiproject Guster

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

  1. hmwithtalk
  2. Darkedge

Comments: If this goes ahead, I'll try and help as much as I can! -Darkedge

Why do people clearly ignore the note at the top of this page? If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. A Guster project is very broad, and should be a taskforce (only if there is enough interest). RobJ1981 22:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But there are Wikiprojects for many other bands. Why not Guster? - hmwithtalk 06:48, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For one, the scope is limited. Second, there is an Alternative rock WP. Third, just-because-there's-an-x-about-x is never a good reason on Wikipedia, especially with a band like this. I just looked it up, and, see reason 1. Chris 07:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, how do you go about making task forces? I don't see any in in Alt Rock WP. - hmwithtalk 16:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, if you look in the "relatives" boxof that project's page, or on the WP:PROJDIR/MUS page, you will see that that project already has a Pixies task force. John Carter 02:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Harmonised Classification of all Wiki Articles

Description
The classification of all relevant articles according to the WCO's harmonised notes and addition of an info-box to the aforementioned articles with the relevant heading. This will involve many thousands of articles. This is a universal standard in international trade from which all local tariffs are taken from.
Interested Wikipedians (user:librarianofages)
  1. [librarianofages]
Comments
  • Huh? Wassis mean? I think it might help if it were clarified what the WCO is and maybe included a link to which kinds of articles might be so classified, with maybe a link to the classification scheme. John Carter 00:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haruhi Suzumiya

Description
This project aims to create and expand a complete corner of wikipedia devoted to the various forms of the metaseries Haruhi Suzumiya. Some primal goals would be completion of the pages, clean up, and expanding certain areas.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Sbloemeke 22:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Sukecchi 23:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
  • I personally think this is much too narrow a scope. Wouldn't a task force be more appropriate?--十八 23:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I thought about that for a while, and then I remembered that certain other anime series have Wikiprojects and are working. I thought that this would be a large enough scope for enough activity, as there is a lot of work to do on it. It could potentially encumber the series, the books, the episode list, some biographies, the manga, etc. Plus then getting them all up to good article status. I was thinking it was a broad enough scope. I'll certainly set up a task force if this fails, but I think it might just be large enough. Sbloemeke 23:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • All I'm saying is that currently Category:Haruhi Suzumiya does not have nearly enough articles to constitute a WikiProject that is going to stay active. Haruhi Suzumiya may be popular, but that is mostly going to be it's downfall since fans of the show love to include cruft in the articles, most specifically the character bios. I still ask you to reconsider.--十八 02:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • This would be an unnecessary project. Maybe make it a task force of WP:ANIME, but even then, we have great collaboration using just the article talk pages as it is. One of the reasons that other shows have projects is because they have a huge number of articles that require cleanup, etc. Our Haruhi articles are in pretty good shape, though, and there really isn't as much of things to fix. Some projects were simply started before we had a strong concept of taskforces, but are really just that. As someone who's been somewhat involved with these articles I don't think we need this extra step, as it can backfire and just make for needless bureaucracy and complication. See: Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Topic Co-ordination on a talk page. -- Ned Scott 03:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, I have to disagree. They really aren't in that good of a shape. We're missing pages on most of the books, there's not a single good article in it, and every charecter bio needs cleanup. I'm probably going to start once I get back from Cleveland, but I think that it is almost neccassary at this point.Sbloemeke 11:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • They're far from complete, yes, but my point is that a full-on project really isn't going to help us any more than what we are doing now. If we do anything it will be a task force. Show-specific WikiProjects is a concept of the past, and makes things harder to do. There is no consensus to make such a project at this time. -- Ned Scott 02:53, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Homestar Runner

Description
[This project will try to improve all articles related to the flash cartoon series "Homestar Runner"]
Interested Wikipedians
  1. Wikizilla (Talk)signme! 20:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

There are many Homestar fans out there, and if we joined up, we could benefit wikipedia.

Too broad of a scope. It should be a taskforce as per what the top of the page says: If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. I don't understand why people just choose to ignore what it says. RobJ1981 21:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest RobJ1981 meant to say "Too narrow of a scope" instead of "Too broad of a scope". --Kevinkor2 10:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hotels

Description: I'm proposing this WikiProject as I feel that the hotel articles on Wikipedia could benefit from such a coordinated effort. The project would aim to collaborate and direct the efforts of editors interested in improving and building upon hotel articles. The primary aim of this WikiProject would aim to establish a structure and consistency with hotel-related articles. I'm aiming to keep this as broad as possible at this time - open to suggestions.

Any comments regarding the proposed creation of this project would be much appreciated.

Temporary project page: User:Luckyluke/WikiProject Hotels

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name):

Comments

Hungary

Description
an expansion of the now-inactive and very small-scoped Wikipedia:WikiProject Historical Hungarian counties, using the original framework but expanding to include other things in this populous and unique European nation. There is an existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Hungarian culture, the national project would seek to cover other topics-politics, biography, flora and fauna...
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Chris 08:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. John Carter 19:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Intelligence Agencies

Description
Within the scope of the project would be all the intelligence and counter-intelligence (domestic and international) agencies/organizations of the world (CIA, MI5, Mossad, KGB, etc.), their operations, their leaders and operators, etc. This project is to also include government, political and commercial intelligence operations as well as private intelligence companies.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Kimon (talk · contribs)
Comments

Inter-religious content

Description
There are a number of articles which relate to religion which clearly deal with more than one religion. Unfortunately, the majority of the religion projects deal specifically with only a single religion, and may not be qualified to provide a fair view of a given inter-religious article. This proposed group would attempt to deal with these subjects by trying to bring together good editors familiar with a variety of religions who could try to hammer out a way to present all the faiths involved in these articles, in a fair, non-POV, accurate way. I acknowledge that this may be rather difficult to do, but that is all the more reason that the attempt should at least be made.
Temporary page
Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/Inter-religious content task force
Interested wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 16:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. C.Logan 02:02, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Sefringle 01:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. George 15:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Richard 17:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Itsmejudith 22:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
OK, I have created the page. Why don't you expand the task force page.--Sefringle 01:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this would probably work best as a TF of WP Religion. Pastordavid 15:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've long been wanting to create a Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy of religion to unite theist and atheist Wikipedians who want to work on neutral and high quality articles on issues related to the existence of God. I'm currently very busy in real life, but I still wonder what people think about this idea. It's a bit related to inter-religious content, but the focus would be on the intersection of philosophy and theology, so it would be a sub-project of WikiProject Philosophy. Any comments? --Merzul 17:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Journals

Description
This project will focus on improving the number and quality of articles about journals and other academic output.
Temporary Project Page
User:Jayvdb/Journals
Interested wikipedians (please add your name below)
Comments

Kinks, The

Description: This project would focus on the creation, expansion, and maintainace of articles related to british rock band The Kinks.

Temporary project page:
None at this time.

User: Painbearer

Interested Wikipedians: Painbearer

Comments: If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 00:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • How many pages would The Kinks actually need? I don't think a whole project is needed just to maintain a few articles.. Perhaps this would fall under the musicproject?GavinTing 07:45, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lawyers

Description
This is a proposed project dealing with the subject of biographies of people in the legal professions, be it lawyers, law enforcement, judges, or others involved in the practice of law and law enforcement.
Interested wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 17:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Newyorkbrad 19:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. .V. 20:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Would it also include professors of law? --Legis (talk - contributions) 19:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. Am I wrong in thinking most professors also function, in at least a "sidelight", as practicing lawyers as well? If that is true, then clearly it would. Where that isn't true, that would be a question for the members to decide, but I would see no inherent reason to say "no". John Carter 19:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I like this idea, as well as including law professors. .V. [Talk|Email] 20:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lead Paragraph Cleanups

Description

The problem of lenthy lead paragraphs here on wikipedia is becoming very serious, perhaps 20% of all articles open with very long segemented and complicated lead paragraphs. I propose to manage a group to work on tagging and cleaning up a large number of the articles with lead paragraphs that are either to long or too short in accords to WP:LEAD. Tasks will entail, tagging, editing and bringing discussions to a consensus on the issues relevant to the topic. The appropriate length of a lead depends on subject of the article. This is an important matter since the "lead" immediately grabs the attention of the reader. to meet quality standards.

User: Frummer

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

  1. Frummer
  2. Filll
  3. Nishkid64
  4. Sam Dorrance
  5. Scholarus
  6. --HybridBoy 09:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • I agree, create it . And in science and technology, we could create a divulgation WikiProject.

Los Angeles

Description:

As the second most populated city in the [[United States}}, Los Angeles certainly deserves a WikiProject devoted to the improvement of the hundreds if not thousands of articles on Wikipedia that relate to it. Given that New York City and Chicago already have their own WikiProjects, it would be unjust to let Los Angeles dwindle in the background without any attempt at improving her articles to a feature quality standard.

Interested Wikipedians:
  1. FitzColinGerald
Comments:

Lyrics

Description
This WikiProject, if given the OK, would be to add the lyrics to articles about songs, if any. I feel it would give readers a better idea about the songs if they have not heard it before... of course, the lyrics would have to be referenced from a realiable source.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Mario Sonicboom Jump! Slash! Dash! Ouch! 16:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Comments

Be very careful with this one, and follow Wikipedia:Lyrics and poetry. Chris 04:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, "adding the lyrics to articles about songs" is definitely not OK. Quoting a line or two in a commentary is acceptable, but copy/pasting the whole thing is a copyright violation. Zetawoof(ζ) 21:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although some older songs which either never had or have had copyright lapse might qualify, like maybe John Barleycorn, I agree that for most songs inclusion of lyrics is a great way to get the lawyers rushing the metaphorical door of wikipedia with summonses in hand. John Carter 00:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. With the type of songs that could have their lyrics added, this would almost be best as a task force of Wikipedia:WikiProject World music. -- TimNelson 01:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Use Wikisource:WikiProject Lyrics. You also can add *.Kar (Karaoke) MIDI files to Commons. --HybridBoy 10:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Madagascar (country)

Description
The goal of this WikiProject would be to describe the animals, geography, climate, people/society, and government of the African country Madagascar. It would aim to clean up (edit) articles relating to the country, expand articles such as stubs, and to create articles in need of creation. This WikiProject would enable a better understanding of Madagascar.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

Proposer of WikiProject: Swannie

Comments

Malaysia

Description

This project would aim to manage, clean up, collect and edit articles about Malaysia. There are many articles on Malaysia which need work, for example, many articles are lacking references or lacking altogether. This project covers a country, which of course is a very important subject in it's own right. This project would help to improve the general quality of articles about Malaysia and it is surprising this project has been started yet. However, since I am relatively new to Wikipedia, I thought it would be better to see if this idea has any support before attempting it.

Interested Wikipedians ( please add your name here)
Comments

Measurement

Description
This project or task force (I'm agreeable to both) would deal with the various articles wikipedia has relating to units of measure.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 20:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Gerry Ashton 20:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Rhialto 22:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --HybridBoy 11:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Over 40 of these articles are of a great deal of importance to wikipedia, but they have disparate, if any, organized project input and management. This proposal would seek to address that situation.

I suggest also include measures in IS system in article with other non-standard measures. I.e. XX hp ------> YY kW (XX hp) --HybridBoy 11:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson

Description

This will be a task force devoted to covering the life and career of American singer-songwriter and entertainer Michael Jackson.UberCryxic 23:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. UberCryxic
  2. :: ehmjay
  3. Paaerduag
  4. MPD01605
  5. Fighting for Justice
Comments

Given the level of worldwide interest in Michael Jackson, I think it makes sense to have a wikiproject devoted to him, so I encourage all potentially willing parties to show your support. Thank you!UberCryxic 23:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Microformats

Not knowing of this page, I recently created Wikipedia:WikiProject_Microformats to allow and encourage the discussion, deployment and documentation of microformats in Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett 15:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile Phones

Description : This WikiProject would be for the improvement and standardisation of Mobile Phone articles. Many of the exisiting articles lack category boxes and there is a distinct mix of info boxes across the entire range. I therefore propose a project be created to offer standards for all mobile phone articles.

Interested Wikipedians
  1. ELaverick
  2. --HybridBoy 11:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Which boxes do you propose ?. --HybridBoy 11:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monk

Description : This project would create episode data for the Monk episodes, as well as character updates, and other things of that sort.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. WTRiker-Talk to me
  2. GavinTing
Comments

If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 23:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, certain TV shows have their own projects, such as The Simpsons. Monk seems popular enough to me, so I think it should deserve it's own project. Correct me if I'm wrong. =D GavinTing 10:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Better a Task Force. --HybridBoy 11:07, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mythbusters

Description
This project would focus on creating standards for recounting each show, giving biographical data for all hosts, describing each myth, and better organizing data for the Discovery Channel sho Mythbusters.

Temporary project page:
None at this time.

User: Jaypenguin150

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Jaypenguin150
  2. – AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs
  3. Swannie-I like the idea!
  4. ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever-In responce to JuWiki, we could make each episode have it's own article, like most TV shows.
  5. NDCompuGeek
Comments

MythBusters has only about 20 articles on Wikipedia. Now if it had more than 100 articles on Wikipedia, I would approve it, but MythBusters is way too small for a WikiProject right now. If this project was created anyway, it would probably be deleted (like WikiProject The Naked Brothers Band). Wait until MythBusters grows bigger. — JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 21:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Names

Description
The purpose of this project would be to develop all the articles related to certain given names, nicknames, and family names. We would try to develope more articles to the standard of William (name)
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Remember 18:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Very, very, very, very interesting. --necronudist 18:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nicaragua

Description
Wikiproject to create and advance pages related to Nicaragua. Also, in helping advance the Portal:Nicaragua that i recently created. There are alot of articles in need of expanding and creating.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. — User:LaNicoya\talk
Comments

North American Fresh Water Fishes

Description
This project would be designed to complie information on the various fish and the ichthyology of fresh water environments of North (and possibly) central America (in an effort to narrow Wikiproject Fishes).
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. --Ryan shell 21:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


People Name Origins

Description
This WikiProject would primarily aim at describing where various first and last names (of people) come from and what they mean. It would also improve articles about names of people, and add more information to the articles. Many people wonder where there name comes from, and this would be a great opportunity for them to find out. If names are put into this encyclopedia, then a person can come and look up their name here.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Swannie (proposer of the WikiProject) 00:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

While I think the *idea* is a wonderful idea, I think this project belongs on Wiktionary. See http://en.wiktionary.org/. -- TimNelson 01:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Philosophy of religion

Description
This proposed project would deal with content relating to the Philosophy of religion in an NPOV, non-biased manner.
Interested wikipedians (please add your name below)
Comments

This proposed project would probably be functionally a subproject of both Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy and Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion. However, given its stated scope and goals, it would seem to be more directly relevant to the Philosophy project. John Carter 17:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pixar

Description
Pixar Animation Studios have created some of the most memorable films of modern times, but its article and that of its films require a lot of work. We need to rewrite lots of parts, define what references and trivia are acceptable and reach our ultimate goal, namely that we get Pixar and its films up to Featured Article quality. Our secondary objectives are articles related to people related with Pixar like John Lasseter, Joe Ranft and Steve Jobs. Anyone else interested?
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Proposer: RMS Oceanic 09:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Driveus
  3. --$UIT 17:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. A•N•N•A hi!
  5. wpktsfs 03:02, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Martini833 01:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Bernstein2291 02:53 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Comments

I wasn't sure if this should have been a task force, but since we're looking to improve at least eight articles (and more, as the films are released) I felt that was sufficient to warrant a project. RMS Oceanic 09:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to join up as a task force or child project of Wikipedia:WikiProject Disney. -- Ned Scott 00:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That seems fine.--$UIT 04:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pixar has quite a few articles, and it needs its own WikiProject. I know almost everything about all the Pixar films, long and short, and would be more than glad to join. Since Disney has nothing to do with Pixar, it should not be a part of the Disney WikProject, and it shouldn't be a part of WikiProject Films, because that is way too broad. I would be more than happy to join. A•N•N•A hi! 18:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anna, I disaggree. Disney has lots do do with Pixar. However, I do aggree that Pixar should have its own wikiproject. I agree with SUIT that it might work out best as a child of Wikiproject Disney. Lets discuss...--wpktsfs 03:02, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So how about the Pixar Taskforce?--$UIT 00:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Iºm not sure about taskforce. I think it would be better as its own project, albeit a child project of Disney. Basically, noticible enough for a Project, and linked enough with Disney to be a child project. Thoughts? RMS Oceanic 09:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It needs it's own WikiProject since some of their short films are not Disney branded. Martini833 21:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's always Wikipedia:WikiProject American Animation as a group with which this group could associate. And, considering the current scope of the project is, as stated above, eight articles, I really question whether at this time there is sufficient content to justify an entirely separate WikiProject. John Carter 22:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's more than eight, really. It just so happens those eight are the highest priority of the project. There's also the dozen or so short films they've created, character pages and current and past employees of note. We woudn't be the largest project, but I reckon we'd have plenty to keep us occupied. And remember: more films will come out each year. RMS Oceanic 06:33, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know maybe if someone tracks down all Pixar articles and add them to the project list then we could have the project up and running quickly. I know for sure they have 10 films, 15 or so short films, countless character and director pages, and some uncategorizable pages. So i would say it amounts to (at least) 30 to 50 pages. That is definately enough for a WikiProject. (addition) There could be a WikiProject for all Pixar movies since they have sooooo many articles each so why is a Pixar project such a big problem? Martini833 20:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • It isn't that it's a problem. It's that there already are a number of full Projects out there, and that it's both easier on the people (me) maintaing the directory, and probably easier on the members of the project itself, if they allow an existing project to handle the "paperwork" of the project (assessments, banner, potentially peer review and collaboration) and allow the members of the more focused group more opportunity to focus their attention on the content. The only real functional differences between a task force and a WikiProject are the name and the banner on the talk page. It's already the case that many of the full banners are being hidden in the {{WikiProject Banners}}, so that functionally leaves the only real difference the name. Personally, as someone who was proposed and/or created three task forces for Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity, (Iglesia ni Cristo, and Methodism and Baptist on this page) it's easier and less time-consuming to create a task force than a full, stand-alone project, particularly if, as in this case, the proposal basically deals exclusively with content which is already within the scope of another, existing project. John Carter 14:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This should be a taskforce, not a project in my opinion. As the note at the top says: If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Making only a few number of films isn't that big of a scope for a project. Why is that hard to understand? Instead of making tons of tiny projects: use taskforces, then the related project can help out and so on. RobJ1981 22:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pocket pets

Description
A descendant project of Wikiproject Mammals. Scope would cover all small mammals traditionally considered "pocket pets" potentially including the fancy mouse, fancy rat, guinea pig, ferret, gerbil, sugar glider, rabbit and hamster.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. VanTucky
  2. Ahc
  3. youngamerican
  4. John Carter 23:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Teh Ferret 20:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC) ferret is a pocket pet?[reply]
  6. User:The Eggplant Thief So long as rabbits are included ;D
Comments

I might change the name, as it is at least to me kind of unusual. But I certainly think it is a worthwhile idea. John Carter 14:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name is necessary because it is the only noun for this category of small pet mammals, which do not all fall in any taxonomic group together beyond small mammals, which is pretty vague. Pocket pets is a specifically defined group. VanTucky 23:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As it seems the minimum of five members to create a project page isnt happening, this project is on hold until we meet the requirement. VanTucky 23:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If they are all mammals (I think they are), has anyone considered maybe creating this as a task force of Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals? John Carter 23:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the task force idea, but why not make it WikiProject Rodents instead? That covers just about every animal mentioned besides the rabbit & sugar glider. - hmwithtalk
The only real differences I can see are the 200 or so articles dealing with the rabbits, and the fact that the rabbit and sugar glider aren't genetically tied to the rodents, but to other families. I personally can see a fairly good argument for both alternatives. John Carter 20:35, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I know, that's why I said "That covers just about every animal mentioned besides the rabbit & sugar glider." - hmwithtalk 20:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Consider making this a project of Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals. Chris 21:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why it needs to be a task force. Wikiproject Mammals is just an oversight category for other Wikiprojects under its purvail (such as Wikiproject Dogs). It doesnt actually contribute that much. And besides, it is too busy with more important tasks than standardizing, expanding and monitoring the content balance of small mammals kept as pets. As to the name, pockets pets is a dictionary accepted term for those specific mammals kept as pets. Not all of them are rodents, and even if they were, it focuses on only those kept domestically. Rodents is too broad. Seems we have more interested members now, I think I'll get to creating a page. Any help with a project talk template (and maybe a userbox) would be great considering I don't know step 1 about how to do those things. Oh, and this isnt too narrow to be its own project in my opinion. In fact, it is an expanding group. I think Degus should be considered within the scope as well. VanTucky 21:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Political Scandals and Controversies

Description
A project dedicated to accurately describing past and current political scandals and controversies so that readers will have an accurate account of the facts and sources
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. — Remember 15:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. — dkatten 16:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. — Sholom 17:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. — --Uncle Ed 19:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  1. I think this would be a good project for a focused group to work on so that current political scandals and controversies have accurate information and are done in a NPOV way. Because so many people rely upon wikipedia to get access to current controversial information, it is important that we make sure to provide the best information we can. Remember 15:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe a group focused on political scandal has a very strong possibility of becoming a de facto decider of fact and the potential to become a POV hit-squad. I think the idea is well intentioned, but I just see too many potential problems with a group dedicated to scandals & controversies (groupthink, POV, infighting, etc.). I respectfully decline the offer and hope that this project does not meet with the fate I predicted. Good luck! /Blaxthos 16:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think it will be just the opposite of that, Blaxthos. The purpose, as I see it, is to identify when there is a controversy and then to prevent a Wikipedia article from trying to "decide" facts. I've been a Wikipedian longer than 99.99% (I am user #188), and the perennial problem has been a groupthink which has the effect of making Wikipedia endorse certain POVs. If we try, we can counter this trend. --Uncle Ed 19:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I see your point, but looking from other side of the looking glass, I would hate to see this group become the self-appointed "guardian of what's right." I've seen (most notably in AfD discussions) a particular organized group or wikiproject able to organize enough support / likeminded editors to dominate WP:CONSENSUS discussions (becoming the de facto authority). High minded ideals aside, the obvious solution would seem to be what Lincoln did in the civil war days -- include enough viewpoints in your council that none shall dominate. I think, however, that such a group which consciously forms to become the deciding body is inherently dangerous. I'm glad to see its stewardship in experienced / capable hands.  :-) I still must respectfully decline. /Blaxthos 19:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • In my opinion there are probably more "controversy" articles than we really need (at least in certain high-profile areas, like American politics), and I hope that this project could narrow these down and improve their quality, rather than see a proliferation of new "controversy" articles.--Pharos 19:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that it is a very good idea, if the main focus is on addressing POV and source issues, but it depending on how it runs it could be quite vulnerable in the ways User:Blaxthos mentioned. I do however think it's worth the attempt. baby_ifritah 00:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Product Design/ Technical Information

Description
An attempt to create, better and categorise articles related to product design, but not exclusively industrial design. These would include information on designs/products, design theory and design tools/ resources. Emphasis given to technical information/data, such as:
  • specifications
  • manufacture process
  • diagrams, schematics and pictures

and any other legitimate useful information.

This resource would be useful to consumers, designers/engineers, DIY hobbyists and enthusiasts. There is a lack of quality technical information on Wikipedia, however there is a lots of knowledge out there that could be harnessed by the wiki format . I feel there is no reason Wikipedia shouldn't have better design resources.

I understand there are issues of pages may get bloated by “excessive” technical information/data and so a solution would be short summary in the main descriptive article with a complimentary detailed technical page. This technical page could link to relevant resources (manuals, guides and tutorials} in Wikisource, Wikibooks, and on external sites. It would link to various Wikipedia projects, portals and categories. A portal “Product Design” would be developed:

[3]


Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Chendy 01:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Provide Alternatives to Technical Jargon (Divulgatiion)

Description
There is an understandable tendency within any specific profession to use shortcut words to help make communication quicker and clearer between the experts in that profession. Unfortunately, in an encyclopedia, that's a bad thing, since the goal is for the encyclopedia to teach general consumers interested in self-educating about those specialized concepts, and that insider-driven jargon tends to alienate or intimidate outsiders.
The overall mission/goal for the project would be to keep technical articles accessible to non-expert readers. While technical jargon specific to any field can keep the prose concise and accurate, the unfortunate side-effect is to increase the amount of effort required for a non-expert, or a person not part of that scholarship to understand the topic and the encyclopedic prose.
My contention is that if Wikipedia truly is for the masses, as Wikipedia:Wikiproject Countering systemic bias and Wikipedia:About seem to imply, it's our responsibility to keep language clear and accessible for all of the people who would use it. I don't think it's necessary to stamp out the use of technical jargon, but I do think it's possible and would be helpful to provide parenthetical or footnoted alternate explanation for those who might not understand the technical jargon.
For example, while editing an article recently in the Medicine WikiProject, I was struck by the term, "Psychosocial Morbidity" used to describe a possible developmental symptom of Klinefelter's syndrome. While the term does not mean that a person displaying the symptom necessarily has a terminal illness, it would be easy to draw that conclusion from the terminology. It would be helpful, perhaps, to insert a parenthetical comment into the article, or a reference, that talks about how the "morbidity" of the term talks about the psychological self not developing fully and doesn't address the topic of literal death at all.
Similarly, it could conceivably be just as important to a new scholar of military history to know that there is a difference in accuracy and other traits between a musket and a rifle, or a bow and a crossbow.
Additionally, it's possible for the heavy use of technical jargon to hide NPOV issues in articles, and for that reason as well, it would be good to try to make the details of an article something everyone could easily understand.
As with all of these kinds of semantics issues, there are obviously poor ways to go about compensating for the issue and good ways, and it would be an interesting challenge with worthwile results, I think, to try to address dynamic this within Wikipedia itself.
Interested Wikipedians
  1. MalcolmGin (talk · contribs) 21:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --HybridBoy 11:09, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I would create a (Science and Tecnology) Divulgation Project. --HybridBoy 11:09, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recently Deceased Biographies

Description
A biography on wikipedia gets a lot of attention right after a notable person dies. The purpose of this project would be to help get that article up to a high standard and monitor the site so that those that stumble upon wikipedia for information about the deceased person would see our best quality product.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Remember 14:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Tom M. 20:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. SailorAlphaCentauri 15:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  1. There's no topicality to bind users together is there? There's no way this is a viable WikiProject imho. What it could and perhaps should be is a page within WikiProject Biography. Just create a page for interested users to congregate at. You don't need any project banner or anything as you won't be claiming "ownership" of any pages ("recent" soon expires, after all). --kingboyk 14:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I disagree that it is viable. While there is no topic to bind people, there is a uniform mission (i.e., to make sure that all biographies of currently deceased people are up to a certain quality and maintain that quality during the period that they have the most traffic). Remember 02:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC
- I agree with Remember, that it IS viable.Tom M. 20:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This should be a taskforce of the Biography project. A seperate project just for recently deceased people is a bit broad. RobJ1981 20:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relational Databases

Description
There are many database topics on Wikipedia, but they are incosistently formatted, generally need cleanup for content, POV/neutrality, and are poorly referenced. They are also not very well organized and sometimes hard to find.
I'd like to get working at collecting them, but it's a task bigger than me alone. First, building a list of the involved topics is necessary. The project includes topics releated to database administration, database technologies, SQL programming, alternative languages, relational theory, database theory, and probably a few other areas.
The project strictly does not include non-relational databases (such as object stores, flat files, and so on). It does not include specific instances of databases, such as those found online or commonly used as services.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Mikeblas 21:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Kevinkor2 00:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Diletante
Comments
I'm a little mixed about the scope. Maybe "relational" is too limiting. I think the scope includes all of thes subects in {{databases}}, plus many more. -- Mikeblas 12:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I recently proposed a #Database project with similar goals, which would encompass non-relational databases as well. I too feel the scope should be broadened to include non-relational databases (hierarchical databases, object-oriented databases, XML data stores, and flat files to name a few). SqlPac 18:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Religious leaders

Description: Many religious leaders, particularly founders of new faiths, arise from an existing religious tradition. However, the wikipedia content relating to this figures will generally be added in primarily by adherents of the faith the person founded, not those from the faith s/he arose from. On that basis, I am proposing a group which I anticipate would be a work group of either (or both?) WikiProject Biography and WikiProject Religion to help ensure that these articles are addressed in a comprehensive and NPOV manner.

Project page:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/Religious leaders work group

User:

  1. Badbilltucker 15:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians:

  1. Scifiintel 23:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --$UIT 02:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. John Carter 23:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC) - We definitely need a biography group for religious figures.[reply]
  4. I would definitely support this as a task force of WP:Religion and WP:WPBIO, and help out as I am able. Perhaps it would help if we could first come up with a definite scope - i.e., what classifies a person as a "religious leader" (for our purposes). Pastordavid 18:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --HybridBoy 11:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:'

  1. I agree and think this is very important and needs to be put in place in order to help facilitate others having a better understanding of different religions and cultures. Scifiintel 23:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I suppose we could use the functional defintion of those affiliated with the "clerical" professions (possibly including rabbis, priests, and other ministers) as well as the more obvious "lay leaders", although no examples of the latter come immediately to mind. John Carter 00:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is now a rough temporary project page listed above. I can't believe how complicated these biography pages are. But if the group does get formally recognized, I will do everything I can to fill it out. John Carter 22:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

Description
There are a number of review processes on Wikipedia. Many of them are backlogged and/or receive sparse responses. Responses can be inconsistant and inadequate. The purpose of a reviews project would be to boost participation and improve the quality of reviews. "Reviews" is intended to cover requests for feedback, editor reviews and similar areas of the wiki. Responses to such requests help provide essential feedback for improving Wikipedia. Improving review participation will have a positive effect on both content and editing atmosphere.
Temporary project page

User:Vassyana/WikiProject Reviews (draft)]

User

Vassyana 14:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. ...
Comments

Revolutions of 1848

Description
In 1848, liberal, nationalist, idealistic and republican revolutions swept across Europe. All the revolutions eventually failed, but nevertheless, the years of 1848-49 were a monumental turning point in the history of Europe, and their repercussions are being felt to this very day. I am terribly dismayed that Wikipedia's coverage of these revolutions is so poor and I appeal to all Wikipedians interested in the history of Europe to join in this project. Next year marks the 160th anniversary, and I for one would like to see our set of 1848 articles vastly improved by that time.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. K. Lásztocska 21:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Chris 09:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. KissL 12:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Εξαίρετος (msg) 15:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. István 20:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Harrypotter 08:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Rhodesia

Description
to improve and preserve articles related specifically to this area prior to 1980
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Chris 07:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. John Carter 19:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

With the proliferation of national WikiProjects, even one for Austria-Hungary, 90 years gone, would there be enough interest to justify such a project as this?

You might want to check with the proposed Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Eastern Africa group first. Personally, it seems to me that there may be more editors with interests in Europe than Africa, and that might be why the Austria-Hungary project exists. It might be a better idea to create the larger group first, and then, when it is known whether there is enough interest, to create task forces of that larger group. Badbilltucker 15:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Austria-Hungary project appears to be inactive. Since you want to deal with pre-1980, such a project can also be part of WP Former countries. - 52 Pickup 20:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Richmond, Virginia

Description
to improve all articles related to Richmond, Virginia
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Neldav 21:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Roads in New York City

Description
This Wikiproject will be dedicated to expanding pages about roads and bridges in The New York City Area
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Bernstein2291

Robotics

Description
WikiProject Robotics- This project would incorporate all the robotics articles together and improve/clean them as with all WikiProjects. UAV's, industrial and domestic, as well as military robots would be covered. Developmental aspects would be covered. Also components of robots, (motors, microcontrollers, electronics) would be covered. Finally, locomotion systems, electronic theory, artificial intelligence and generally anything else in the scope of robotics would be covered. The regrettable thing is, I am nowhere near competent enough to do such a project. So if anyone is interested, and knows how, please start it up!
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. NightFalcon90909 19:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Maverick423 16:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Ph0t0phobic 19:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --HybridBoy 11:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I used to make small robots and all that good stuff when i was younger. So i know i can help out here =) Maverick423 16:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very good. Go ahead. Perhaps can we add also automation? --HybridBoy 11:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Runescape

Description
We could like update people on what is happening with runescape and help with the holiday events
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [Elderleo]
Comments
  • They have a website to "update people on what is happening with x and help with the holiday events". It's called MySpace. This is Wikipedia, an encyclopedia. Thanks for coming out. Chris 23:59, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Steely Dan

Description: This WikiProject is for (you guessed it) Steely Dan. Right now, only is the Steely Dan article itself lacking information, but the albums' articles are not formatted properly and disorganized. Finally, most songs are missing as articles (and the ones that do have articles don't have infoboxes and such), which is a shame, since most Steely Dan songs are quite deep and their unique lyrics make them interesting to analyze. So what do you say? All you Steely Dan fans out there sign up!

User:
Nauticashades (talk · contribs)

Temporay Page:
User:Nauticashades/WikiProject Steely Dan

Interested Wikipedians: (please add your name)
Sign up at User:Nauticashades/WikiProject Steely Dan also

  1. BabuBhatt (talk · contribs)
  2. Daniel Case (talk · contribs)
  3. Theoldanarchist (talk · contribs)
  4. DrDevin (talk · contribs)
  5. Chadbryant (talk · contribs)
  6. Fenrir2000 (talk · contribs)

Comments:

Synthesizers

Description: This wikiproject aims to document synthesizers and their use in popular music. These instruments have played an increasingly important role in shaping the musical output of artists over the last 50 years. They have also spawned completely new genres of music as musicians work with electronic instruments exclusively. Unlike general classes of instruments, such as guitars, each model of synthesizer is engineered with the ability to create unique sounds and each is therefore a unique instrument in its own right.

User: Mperry 19:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary project page: There is no page as of this moment.

  • Interested Wikipedians (please add your name):
  1. Phantasy Phanatik
  • GreyCat: I'd like to join and help this project, starting with most basic theory about synthesizers - such as describing all major components, synthesis types, algorithms, then proceeding to individual pieces of equipment / software.

Comments:

Television children's shows

Description
I've noticed that TV show articles are vandalized a lot, and since children's shows hold a startlingly high percent of this; some have not had articles made. Users in this project would monitor children's show articles that they know well and make sure that everything is in check and has not been vandalized, and create pages for shows lacking them and monitor them. P.S. I would need help making this. Superx 00:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Superx 00:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. – AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs color="blue">+sign here+How's my editing?) 01:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Expressing interest

Having just spell-checked and copy-edited the above description, I would anticipate that if this project did go ahead it should be under Children's television shows although it doesn't have much support yet... Mdcollins1984 14:13, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tornadoes

Description
A project to organize, standardize, and improve articles on Tornadoes and other severe weather phenomena.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. RunningOnBrains 20:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. – AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs color="blue">+sign here+How's my editing?) 01:55, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --HybridBoy 11:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Trucks

Description
The purpose of this WikiProject is to co-ordinate articles on light, medium and heavy trucks. It aims to improve the coverage of manufacturers and models, and to make articles on trucks uniform and informative.
Rotten Stone 13:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary project page
User:Rotten Stone/WikiProject Trucks
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Kieran T (talk | contribs)
  2. FabioTalk Definatly agree, there needs to be a more uniform article structure on trucks and i think a project may accomplish this.
  3. G®iffen likes to help, but it's probably not much from me as mentioned below
  4. Hasannur OK, I'm interested and willing to help
  5. Tepoo I agree with projects description. I'm willing to help but regrettably I don't have enormous amounts of time to contribute towards this project.
  6. --HybridBoy 11:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  1. Trucks
What's wrong with the current article that we need a new project? Peter Horn 16:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Copy and paste of a comment on Rotten Stone Peter Horn 16:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Compare Automobile and Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles to see the worth of a project which draws people in to the breadth of the field. – Kieran T (talk) 17:15, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with the main article about trucks. However, if you compare with the coverage of automobiles, aircrafts and trains, there are surprisingly few articles about various truck models. To be honest I also find most articles on truck manufacturers rather thin (example). Of course this won't be solved by just adding a new project, but a project will help make new articles more conform and thereby of grater value to the readers. It will also be easier for users to add new information or new articles if there are suitable templates, like infoboxes, to pick from. Rotten Stone 17:47, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Following the example link I see that Unimog is well overdone compared to the other models...
I miss some more country-specific details on rules etc. to the truck-article. About models I see that Volvo is even worse, I actually started up one model with a photo only in the hope that sby would feel provoked to write the text to it (since I don't have the faintest idea of model history - I only drive the things). My problem on a truck project would be that
  1. I have a work without computer
  2. I have 2 small kids taking a lot of my home time
  3. I work mostly at the da:Wiki, especially when it comes to technical articles, since my school-english didn't include technical terms.
Anyway I think a project could help this subject, but I am afraid I cant help as much as I would like to :-( --G®iffen 17:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • If it covered road going trucks, trailers, buses, motorhomes and perhaps implements (ie everything not covered by the existing automobile and motorbike wikiprojects), I think that it would have more chance of gaining the member numbers needed for viability. I've looked at this proposed project several times and concluded that, as currently proposed, its scope is too narrow. --Athol Mullen 06:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unicycling

Description
This project would help promote and coordinate articles related to unicycling and unicycles. It would provide a location to outline and enhance the structure of existing and future articles, and it would perhaps be similar to the existing projects: Wikipedia:WikiProject Cycling and Wikipedia:WikiProject Motorcycling.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. AndrewDressel 18:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. User:Mathmo
  3. User:RMBradburn
Comments

Existing articles include:

  • Events
  • People

And The Unicyclopedia

University of Wisconsin System

Description
This project would help to improve the quality of articles that are a part of the University of Wisconsin System and its universities, such as University of Wisconsin-Madison, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and many others. There are currently 92 articles in the "Category:University of Wisconsin-Madison", and there are many other articles related to the other universities.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Lordmontu
Comments
Better a WikiProject University. --HybridBoy 11:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Integrity

Description
A WikiProject to make sure that all user accounts stay secure.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. mrholybrain's talk 02:09, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary Project Page
User:Mrholybrain/WikiProject User Integrity
Comments
One question: HOW? In principal, I like the idea, but I would like to know what procedures if any can be undertaken to achieve the goal. John Carter 14:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uttar Pradesh

Description
Uttar Pradesh is a state in India. This wikiproject will be a child project of WikiProject Indian states which in turn is a child project of WikiProject India. Projects for several other Indian states already exist.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Maquahuitl 14:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Better a task force in WikiProject India. --HybridBoy 11:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weasels

Description
This wikiproject is to help the articles related to Ferrets, Weasels, and other animals inside the SuperFamily Musteloidea. This would be a much appreciated project by many wikipedians.
Interested Wikipedians
  1. Teh Ferret 19:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC) Btw i only intended it to be for ferrets and weasels but i had to make it bigger for it to be project sized.[reply]
  2. - hmwithtalk 20:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC) (but I'm only in it for the ferrets!)[reply]
  3. Drakelruler 20:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I started of with a ferret wikiproject but then decided to go into a much wider range and include all animals in the superfamily Musteloidea. Please help me in my search to improve all ferret and weasel articles on wikipedia.
  1. John Carter 22:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC) - I like the idea, but think it would probably work best as a work group of Mammals. That way, there's less duplication (banners, assessment, etc.), and it might be easier to get collaborative efforts off the ground. John Carter 22:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template Page: (working on it)

File:FerretDomestic123.PNG This article is within the scope of the Weasel WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to Ferrets, Weasels, and other Weasel like friends. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

A little template i made for the project.

Comments;

Consider making this a project of Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals. Chris 21:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How about making it wikiproject Carnivores and Wikiproject Herbivores, Wikiproject Insectivores and Wikiproject Omnivores? Teh Ferret 22:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what the "it" you're referring to is, there, I'm afraid. John Carter 22:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry english is my second language, I meant we could have new wikiprojects, take away the old Mammals wikiproject and divide it(the old wikiproject) into Carnivores Wikiproject, Herbavores Wikiproject, Insectivores wikiproject, And possibly an Omnivores Wikiproject.
No problem. Generally, though, given the existing pages, categories, and whatnot, it is all but impossible to split up an existing project into several different new projects. It can easily be done to create subprojects of the project for each of the four groups you suggested. Personally, though, given that the genetic and not dietic similarities of animals are generally the most "telling" and important, I think it might work best if they were divided along genus and family rather than diet. John Carter 19:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weezer

Description
Weezer is considered one of the most important and influential bands of recent times.[who?] There is so much to be written about the band. I feel albums like Pinkerton (album) and Weezer (The Blue Album) have enough potential to be feature articles.
The Person who proposed it
User:wikiwonka12
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Comments

World charities

Description
I think that the question of global charity, non-profit, humanitarian organizations and everything connected with it (persons, biographies, types etc.) worth having the whole separate project in Wiki, as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory/History_and_society. The issue is notable and important. I am not so experienced to begin such project, but it would be nice and appropriate to do this by someone else.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Ans-mo 13:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Rucha58 14:42, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

World History

Description
The History of Human Beings from 11,000 C.E. to the Present day
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Rucha58
  2. --HybridBoy 11:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Ans-mo 06:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  1. Rucha58 20:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC): As I feel that the broad scope of World History has been overlooked by placing it within the Wikiproject History with only one article on the subject (History of the World), I propose making a new project: World History. Anybody who is interested in helping out or proposing ideas may contact me at Rucha58@tampabay.rr.com[reply]
  2. 52 Pickup 15:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC): Nice idea. If you get it up and running, it would be great if your project worked together with WP Former Countries.[reply]

WorldCat Identities - external links

Description
The recently prototyped WorldCat Identities provides pages - linked to the WorldCat union catalog - for 20 million 'identities', mainly authors and persons who are the subjects of published titles. This project would aim systematically to provide external links from biographical pages in Wikipedia to their WorldCat Identities page.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Tim O'Reilly's reaction to WorldCat Identities was to call for a project like this: “I'd really love to see this tied in programmatically to wikipedia. There ought to be an automatic link to this site for every identity in wikipedia!” WorldCat Identities currently provides thousands of links in the reverse direction, i.e. to en:Wikipedia. Of the over 200,000 biographical articles on Wikipedia, around 20% are reliably automatically matchable to Wikipedia Identities via the Library of Congress Name Authority file (see User:Dsp13). Once WorldCat Identities is stabilized with 'cool' URLs, this project could proceed at full throttle: it would allow easy passage from Wikipedia biographical articles to associated library holdings. Dsp13 15:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How precisely would they be linked from Wikipedia articles? External links, special metadata templates like WP:PERSON, or what? --Gwern (contribs) 21:36 20 February 2007 (GMT)
I was envisaging external links, though that's not incompatible with an external link template like these. Dsp13 23:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure external links is the best solution. It runs afoul of some peoples sense of SPAM, it's a lot of work to create new entries, and there is no guarantee someone in the future won't just delete it - it won't be very consistent. I think the way Wikipedia handles ISBN's would be a better solution to finding library holdings. So long as an author has an ISBN listed, the user is directed to an internal Wikipedia page that lists 100s of sources for books. For example ISBN 0198114915 takes us to a page with WorldCat listed as the first entry. This seems like a cleaner, more consistent solution already in place. -- Stbalbach 15:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, ISBNs are excellent, and very clean. However, two points. First, ISBNs have only been assigned for recently published works. (For historical works, an OCLC number is emerging as a sort of stand-in.) Second, WorldCat Identities gathers together titles by/about a single individual: adding a single external link is certainly no more work than adding several ISBNs (though I see the two as complementary). You're right, though, that external links (especially if not backed by an external link template) run foul of some people's sense of spam. Dsp13 15:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't like them. The pages are nice enough, but they don't really show anything remarkable - certainly they don't seem to be expansive on the subject in the same way that linking to IMDB for films is. We should think very hard before rolling out a comprehensive project to link to a single external site across tens of thousands of pages - like it or not, it constitutes a pretty significant statement on our part as to the importance, usability and significance of their material.
The information on them is automatically generated, not cleaned up by human oversight, and it shows - the Kipling page tells us he wrote "Adventure fiction" and worked as a "Author, Bibliographic antecedent, Lyricist, Translator, Performer, Illustrator, Correspondent". (I am unaware of any notable levels of translating, performing or illustrating - plus what use is 'bibliographic antecedent' to a nonspecialist? - and he wrote a damn sight more than 'Kim'!) The major biography on him is apparently by "Frederick Winston Furneaux Smith Birkenhead", a name that only an authority catalogue could love. The cataloguing graph can't handle the fairly standard "19--" and has at least two or three completely wrong datapoints manual oversight would have caught, and the list of works is confusingly arranged and bizzarely constituted. (I am really not convinced the two named collections of poetry represent identifiably distinct groups of work... one being dated 1956 and "published between 1890 and 2006" seems dubious)
Really, there doesn't seem to be any major content on these external pages that we couldn't do better just writing into the article, and it doesn't serve as a gateway to anything much more than the holdings of a single self-selecting consortium of libraries (which is a lot less comprehensive than it can seem at first glance).
There is a use for these - their aggregate figures on the number of editions of different works is promising, and would be good to cite in passing for a lot of works - but I think we'd be doing our readers and editors a disservice to imagine that these are universally helpful external links. Shimgray | talk | 22:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To call WorldCat nothing 'much more than the holdings of a single self-selected consortium of libraries (which is a lot less comprehensive than it can seem at first glance)' seems entirely misleading to me: it's by far the biggest union catalog ever attempted, includes some major academic libraries and has over 1.1 billion holdings: just watch it grow. As far as your careful criticisms of a WorldCat Identities page goes, though, perhaps I was premature to make this project proposal while WorldCat Identities is such a recent beta project: several of these issues seem teething problems which I hope will get ironed out. What do others think? Dsp13 15:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps we need a "person" equivalent of this service for coordinates or this one of books? Andy Mabbett 01:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that is exactly the way to go, and perhaps should piggy-back off the isbn project. --I think it would be confusing to add formal external links to any service, as most WPedians would not be able to tell this apart from spam, and would suggest all sorts of other possibilities, even such as automatic linking to myspace. Worldcat is a reasonable place for the ultimate resolution--as OpenWorldCat it is freely available, and essentially universal, at least in the US and to a lesser degree the English speaking world. But there are also quite a number of other author-name standardization projects: both Scopus and WebofScience are organizing proprietary ones, as are a number of repository -based and open source projects. DGG 02:05, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note that anything run by OCLC is not at all guaranteed to remain freely available; http://www.frbr.org/2007/05/10/xisbn-v2-pricing-discussions one of their most useful services] just went paid-access for any serious level of use. Shimgray | talk | 23:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Writers

Description
This proposed project would work to create, improve, and maintain articles dealing with writers of books and other print literature.
Interested Wikipedians (Please add your name)
  1. John Carter 16:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --HybridBoy 11:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
This a good general starting point for articles and task forces.--HybridBoy 11:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Team XBox

Description
Team XBox

I am proposing the formation of Team XBox. The purpose of this project is to correct, maintain, unify and make cohesive the coverage of Microsoft XBox products. This will include Services (XBox LIVE), Software, and Hardware (XBox, XBox 360)

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Wikipedia:WikiProject Team XBox

Those interested please goto http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wageslave

Might want to check with WP:VG first. In the past console-specific projects usually fail. -- Ned Scott 03:18, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As there is a Nintendo and a Playstation Project, this would simply mirror those in scope and purpose. You can see both are listed project associated with WP:VG
Like I said, those projects are pretty much dead in the water. -- Ned Scott 07:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zambia

Description
This wikiproject would be dedicating to finding and improving articles related to the country of Zambia as well as being a focus for like minded editors who work on articles about the country. The project would encompass all articles about Zambia including history, politics and the like. There are a lot of articles out there for Zambia and they are fairly halphhazardly edited by folks like me who have an interest. The wikiproject would give a little more focus to said editors. I'm putting feelers out to see if there would be any interest in this.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. --Lendorien 22:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Task forces/Work groups

There are advantages to proposing a new group as a task force of an existing project. Generally, task forces require fewer members to be effective and do not have the same degree of required project maintenance, as much of that is taken on by the parent project. If you would like to set up a new group specifically to function as a task force of another project, please list it below.

Global Perspectives Task force

Hi, forgive me if this is discussed somewhere in the archive or if an extant WikiProject covers my proposal, but: I'm wondering if a task force specifically concerned with making sure global perspectives are represented in key articles would be an efficient way to counter the systemic Western, 1st world bias the WikiProject Countering systemic biaslists among its concerns. As has often been noted, many articles have sections (e.g. "media response") that only describe U.S. events/reactions. I would be happy to spearhead an effort to make sure global perspectives are included where relevant. Any thoughts or advice regarding such a task force would be much appreciated. Keep up the great work!Benzocane 03:43, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea. We could call it Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias! -- TimNelson 03:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the real job of this task force should be to provide international references for articles. Also to provide more in depth reactions of foreign countries when dealing with international crisises. I believe the Task force should be called Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Global perspectives task force. How does that ring.
--Random Say it here! 13:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We can use {{Globalize}} --HybridBoy 11:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals&oldid=132639677"