Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Inclusion

Module:WikiProject banner/doc
This page is a soft redirect.

WP:MOSDAB

Hi. I wonder whether WP:MOSDAB should explicitly make an exception to prevent erradication of external links from disambiguation pages.
To Michael Campbell (disambiguation), I had inserted this line:

• Michael Campbell, American, as 'Mike Campbell' singer, songwriter, musician, and - as 'Michael Champion' - actor
  

Surely, the guy should have had his own article, but I had no intention of spending the time to create it. At least the disambiguation page would now make readers aware of his existence, and the (as reference for a WP article fully admissible) external links would help an interested reader. Better than nothing, I thought - in particular as my line did not draw special attention and did not take more place than the most perfect solution (and even less server burden).
Two editors who guard disambiguation pages however, on turn undid my insert because WP:MOSDAB is against putting external links in a disambiguation page. Thus, I eventually did create a very short article Michael Campbell (musician and actor) and modified the disambiguation page by the book. But I resent having to spend hours instead of minutes, only because style is held above valuable information. So, I drew their attention to this concern, see User_talk:Tassedethe#Michael Campbell (disambiguation) and a discussion developed.
Please, do NOT add to the discussion. But do consider how to prevent editors from forcing out useful content by sticking to style guidelines.
​▲ SomeHuman 2011-07-02 09:54 (UTC)

Status as of 2020

It looks like there are no inclusionists in village pump. Is WikiProject Inclusion dead already? 84.120.7.178 (talk) 01:00, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

(copied from User talk:Thewellman)

Hello, Thewellman. Wikipedia:WikiProject Inclusion is believed to be inactive. It looks like you sympathize with inclusionism, but do not take an active role in this project. Thus, I will move you to the list of inactive participants after a month. Feel free to move back to the list of active participants when you are ready to contribute. 84.120.7.178 (talk) 23:10, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

(copied from User talk:84.120.7.178)

I have noticed your seemingly non-inclusive activity regarding the WikiProject Inclusion membership list. I'm puzzled as to why you regard me as inactive, and where you found that activity criteria. Thewellman (talk) 00:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

(copied from User talk:Thewellman)

Where do you want to have this discussion? 84.120.7.178 (talk) 00:25, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

I have transferred our discussion to the WikiProject Inclusion talk page to invite comments by other project members. Thewellman (talk) 04:08, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

In this edit[1] 84.120.7.178 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) declared themselves to be the maintainer of this project. I am in the process of removing all "maintainer"-related edits. An editor is not allowed to take over a wikiproject and start removing people without first having a discussion on the Wikiproject talk page and asking whether the other participants want a "maintainer", much less electing that user. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:19, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

J 1982, Jpbowen, and Nutiketaiel, now is the time to prove that you are active participants. Thewellman, this is your chance to prove whether you are an inclusionist. We have this evidence:

1. Guy Macon is in favor of deleting on notability grounds.[2][3][4] Do you remember Base58, Mitar?[5]
2. Guy Macon removed himself from this project.[6]
3. I requested access to non-notable articles, an inclusionist proposal.[7]
4. You can see inclusionist editing style in my work at 2017 Summer Universiade.[8][9][10]
5. In this discussion at reliable sources noticeboard, Guy Macon took a deletionist position whereas I took an inclusionist one.[11][12]
6. My maintenance of this project has been through slow and steady editing; this is inclusionist behavior. Guy Macon has undone work quickly[13] without an effort to recover useful edits[14][15][16] or checking participants that have not edited Wikipedia for a year;[17][18][19] this is deletionist behavior.
7. Guy Macon has set up automatic archiving with parameters minthreadsleft = 0, minthreadstoarchive = 1, and algo = old(64d).[20] This configuration makes harder to detect inactivity of the project.
8. This project has been marked as inactive since 24 August 2020‎.[21] It is proof of the horrible state of the project.

The plan of deletionists is obvious: they pretend Wikipedia is unbiased by showing a healthy inclusionist opponent, but this opponent is weak or non-existent in reality. Are you going to let deletionists control this WikiProject? 84.120.7.178 (talk) 23:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

The above WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality clearly shows that 84.120.7.178 is here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and is thus completely unqualified to be the self-appointed "maintainer" of this Wikiproject.

• Regarding my removal of myself, when I saw the talk page notice I assumed that this was a normal instance of there being a consensus regarding participation. When I Thewellman's post I realized that I was wrong and that this is an example of someone electing themselves as "maintainer" and trying to kick out people who they don't like.
• I strongly suspect that 84.120.7.178 used to edit under another name (possibly blocked) and is doing this because they are upset over some non-notable page being deleted.
• There is nothing about being an inclusionist that requires someone to completely reject Wikipedia's notability policy. and even if there were, such an inclusionist would be required to edit according to what Wikipedia's policies are, not what they wish they were. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:31, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

These are difficult times for WikiProject Inclusion as Wikipedia focus is shifting from creating new articles to cleaning up existing articles. Fewer editors seem interested in the latter task than were inspired to participate in the former; and activity among members of WikiProject inclusion seems to follow that trend. I see nothing to be gained by purging our project membership at this time. A scoresheet of inclusionist versus deletionist actions seems pointlessly divisive. All of us should recognize there are some parts of Wikipedia which diminish its reputation, and arguing for their retention would damage the validity of our goals. The spirit of inclusion should extend to our members in recognition that each of us contributes as we are able. Thewellman (talk) 20:40, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I have presented the evidence; I will not discuss with Guy Macon here. Inclusionists should realize what is happening to this project.[22] Now I will continue to check remaining participants. If I do not see any reaction from real inclusionists and this discussion is archived, which should happen after 64 days, I will leave this WikiProject. 84.120.7.178 (talk) 21:50, 29 October 2020 (UTC)