Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Council

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Howard the Duck (talk | contribs) at 13:31, 18 October 2007 (→Philippine collegiate leagues). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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. If you want to start a page before you have 5-10 active Wikipedians, consider setting up the page on a subpage of your user page until it is active, while leaving the posting here with a link to the user page.
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.
Archive
In the event a given proposal does not receive sufficient support within 4 months of posting here to create a project or task force, it is added to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Archive page.

Projects

Edit war resolution

Description: A WikProject dedicated to resolving edit wars and creating a neutral point of view, as well as reverting vandalism and helping to enforce the blocking policy.--Gp75motorsports 13:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians

Comments

Abolitionism

Description: This Wikiproject would focus on anything having to do with abolitionism, the history of abolitionism, instances of abolionism, the biographies of notable abolitionists in United States, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and around the world. Psdubow 21:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

  1. Psdubow 21:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: Am I correct in assuming this is referring to the abolition of slavery? John Carter 20:03, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Abolitionism, the abolition of slavery. Psdubow 23:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility

Description
We like to say that wikipedia is a dictionary anyone can edit. Unfortunately, in a completely objective way, this statement is clearly not true. There are some editors who have personal disadvantages, such as blindness, deafness, limited use of their hands, autism, and so on, which make it very difficult for them to contribute, as these characteristics clearly serve as impediments to their being able to conribute to the encyclopedia. This project would exist to try to assist such editors in making edits to the encyclopedia, and, where required, try to help them keep from being placed under any form of community sanction because of difficulties related to their disadvantages.
Temporary project page
User:Warlordjohncarter/WikiProject Accessibility
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 14:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. L'Aquatique talktome 21:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Graham87 02:47, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. surueña 21:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I acknowledge that some of the attributes listed above currently make contributing to the encyclopedia all but impossible, and that finding ways to address these concerns may not be very easy. That is not sufficient cause to at least try to find alternate ways to accommodate users with these characteristics.

I agree. Disabilities don't change the worthiness of someone's contributions. L'Aquatique talktome 05:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't this a significant overlap with Wikipedia:WikiProject Usability? -- John Broughton (♫♫) 17:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there is some overlap. This group however also seeks to work not only on usability, which generally relates to technical design functions, but also on assisting specific editors who might have specific needs which cannot be addressed by such technical matters. One specific goal would be to be something like the now inactive Wikipedia:Advocate Cabal and try to assist editors who have specific concerns which don't lend themselves to such primarily technical remedies. John Carter 17:23, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agriculture

Description
Project to improve pages related to agriculture such as Agriculture, Domestic Pig, Cattle, etc. with focus on full coverage of their uses to man, as well as breed pages which are not covered at all by Mammals, also pages like wheat and combine harvester, forestry, etc. If there is insufficient interest or too much overlap with other projects such as Plants and Ecology then I would consider a "livestock" project as there is no current project covering breeds of livestock, other than Horse Breeds and there is too much for a task force within Mammals. --Doug. 18:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Doug. 18:28, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. John Carter 18:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. ChristianH158 19:56, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Tom 06:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Richard New Forest 06:20, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Algonquin Round Table

Description
The focus of the project would be articles relating to the Algonquin Round Table, including its members and their literary works.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Otto4711 17:42, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Chris 06:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Wow, a project of depth, thought and lasting impact! Most cool, I'm in! Chris 06:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American History

Description
Goal is to branch off of both the History and US projects to create a project dedicated to improving the quality of existing American History articles. Generally to improve articles about wars such as American Revolutionary War, important people, such as George Washington, and other things, such as the Treaty of Paris (1783).
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Corvus coronoides
  2. ragesoss 15:35, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. John Carter 18:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
I've started creating a page for this project here: User:Corvus coronoides/AMHistory. It can be moved at any time, but if anyone is interested in helping out, I'm adapting this from WP:Australian History. Cheers, Corvus coronoides talk 14:54, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Content related to military history is already addressed by some existing Military history groups, and other aspects are dealt with elsewhere, but I can really see having a group like this exist. John Carter 18:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arunachal Pradesh

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Isaac Asimov

Description
This is going to be a compilation of everything related to Isaac Asimov (Foundation, robot, and galactic empire series,him,Encyclopedia Galactica, and the Foundation Universe.)
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Perseus282
  2. Nate1481(t/c)
  3. John Carter 23:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Voyagerfan5761
Comments
  • am going to include his nonfiction and other fiction i just didn't want to list everything.

Athens

Description
This Wikiproject would help create and expand articles that relate to the city of Athens, Greece. Such articles would be Athens, Athenian Democracy, History of Athens, cultural and historical influence, and so on. The WP would center on the culture, influence, art, philosophy, politics, history, and geography. Other major influential cities like, London, Belfast, Philadelphia, New York, Sydney, and Hong Kong all have WikiProjects.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. El Greco (talk · contribs) 15:55, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Dr.K. 22:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Argos'Dad 15:22, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Kpapadopoulos 22:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Proposal makes eminent sense. Dr.K. 22:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced that this would make more sense than a WP:GREECE Athens task force. And in case we need to draw more attention to the historical articles about ancient Athens, there's always WP:CGR. --Michalis Famelis (talk) 17:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But Athens is so much more. It's influence spans from antiquity and continues today. It's not just Ancient Athens, there's Ottoman/classical Athens, there's the Dilean League, the politics of Greece, all the famous buildings, landmarks, events, famous Athenians, etc. El Greco (talk · contribs) 18:26, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
True. However, there are a few advantages. One, if you were to make yourself a subproject of Greece, you could take advantage of their existing infrastructure, rather than having to create and monitor your own. And, yes, there project banner could probably be adjusted in the same way the Australia banner is adjusted for city projects like on the Talk:Sydney page. Also, in the event that there are several projects relevant to the article, which seems likely as often as not, there will be one less banner on the page. And, if they're combined into the {{WikiProjectBannerShell}}, it could be made to link to the Athens "task force" or whatever anyway. Lastly, task forces aren't recorded as inactive and, potentially, nominated for deletion like projects sometimes are. John Carter 21:27, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not bothered by making all those templates/banners and other stuff up. So far we have 4 members, if one more joins it'll be great. Come on Join the Athens WP!!!! El Greco(talk) 16:09, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Austrian Economics

Description
This WikiProject will help to create and expand articles relating to the Austrian School of Economics and to expand the coverage of Austrian Economics in general Economics articles. This would be a subproject of the Economics WikiProject.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Life, Liberty, Property
Comments
  • Austrian Economics really doesn't have much to do with Austria. From the introduction of its Wikipedia article; "The Austrian School, also known as the "Vienna School" or the "Psychological School", is a school of economic thought that advocates adherence to strict methodological individualism." It is known as Austrian Economics merely because it began in Austria, even though most of the recent Austrian Economists have been Americans. If it were to be a Task Force of a WikiProject, the most suitable WikiProject to make it a Task Force of would be the Economics WikiProject. Life, Liberty, Property 18:27, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A task force can be involved with multiple projects. Kingjeff 18:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Autism

  • This wikiproject would be about autism, asperger's syndrome, people related to said diseases, people on the autistic spectrum, and for news related to autism.

Band of Brothers

Description
The wikiproject is about expanding information about those who served in Easy Company 506th PIR 101st airborne division during World War II
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Codeman177 creator
Comments

This project will require gathering information from books written by survivors and the band of brothers series

Codeman177 16:34, 24 September 2007

  • This might be a really good taskforce of WPMILHIST. Chris 00:56, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please note that per Wikipedia's policy on notability, and WP:NOT, Wikipedia isn't a place for biographies (or even biographical information, in general) about individuals who haven't separately been considered important enough to have national articles about them. A company of soldiers is, what, a hundred or two people, of whom perhaps three or four might have (subsequently) become notable? In short, these seems to involve a handful of articles, which isn't what WikiProjects are intended for. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 12:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beanie Babies

Description
This project would contain articles pertaining to the Beanie Babies fad of the late 1990s. The articles within would be about either the Beanie Babies themselves, news stories and events relating to Beanie Babies, and other concepts that in one way or another, had something to do with the collectibles.

Some articles would be about individual Beanie Babies. An example is Princess (Beanie Baby). Obviously, there cannot be a single article dedicated to each Beanie Baby. Individual articles would be reserved for the most notable ones of all. These may include those that were worth the most money (like Peking, Chilly, or Humphrey), those that had rare versions worth a lot of money (like Peanut or Quackers), those that were otherwise highly sought, or those that represented a particular cause, like Princess.

There may also be articles on certain groups of Beanies that had notability, but in which individual beanies within the group did not have notability. Some examples of groups could be The Original Nine, exclusives to a particular country, Teenie Beanies, etc. Entry of name (Beanie Baby) of a member of the group would then redirect to that page.

For all other beanies that do not fit into a notable group, they could be included on a page that simply provides lists of beanies in charts, along with some rudimentary information. Charts can be divided onto various pages, assorted by topics like the year they were introduced, the year they were retired, the animal type, etc. There could also be pages such as List of Beanie Baby Dogs, List of Beanie Baby Sports Bears, etc.

The purpose of the articles would be to mention how Beanie Babies impacted society, and how the craze affected the behavior of the public. Articles about well-known beanies would, whenever sources could be found, describe how beanies influenced various activities of people, such as spending habits, planned events, and mishaps that were caused (such as fights).

A picture of each beanie that is featured in an article should be included. I, myself have a lot of the beanies that were popular in the 90s, but not all, and most are stored away. I am presently trying to dig them out to photograph them for articles. I would appreciate an effort on the part of others to place pictures. Until a picture can be obtained, the article should remain a stub, or else other notation should be included that a picture is wanted.

I am also doing a lot of research to find links to pages that provide information that can be included in articles. Xyz7890 17:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have some Beanies, and I could take photos and them. Sebwite 20:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Sebwite 20:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Swannie 18:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC) --Sounds like a good idea! :)[reply]

Berbers

Description
I believe this very unique culture, with a one-of-a-kind alphabet Tifinagh and history dating back as far as ancient Egypt, merits its own WikiProject. There is a beautiful portal at Portal:Berbers, and I think Wikipedia would benefit greatly from this.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Chris 18:22, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. FayssalF - Wiki me up® 18:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Funkynusayri
  4. Skatewalk (Mainly Berbers in Iberia)
  5. Taprobanus 19:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

There seems to be enough support to at least merit a task force. Perhaps someone might want to contact Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups and see if they would be interested in taking it on? John Carter 15:20, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Bihar

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Bihar.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Borders

Kimdime69, Poulpy and I are about to start a brand new project dedicated to geopolitical boundaries on the French-speaking version of Wikipedia. In order to do so, we have recently created more than 40 articles — out of 310 — about international borders. As you can see on Frontière terrestre entre le Brésil et la France and on other pages, their content deals with as many topics as geography, history and international law. Thus, they all can become quite large and interesting. Moreover, many pictures and maps can be found on Commons and added to them.

Yet, as it appears that none of the other Wikipedias have followed us down our path, we are now wondering whether or not it is a good idea to go on and set up a project on its own. That's why I am interested in getting your points of view. And also because some help from the English version would be great. Thierry Caro 22:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. ALK
  2. John Carter 20:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I hope this message was sent in the right place. If not, feel free to move it accordingly. Thierry Caro 22:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It probably is. I do have a few questions, and my apologies that my own French is nonexistent.
Borders will be the first step. When completed, the project will then extend a little bit, for instance to enclaves. Thierry Caro 14:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am. We would like to have an international approach on the subject. Thierry Caro 14:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bowling

Description
This WikiProject would aim to improve the quality of and expand the coverage of bowling-related articles on Wikipedia.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. – Alex43223 T | C | E 18:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Mearnhardtfan 20:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. IstvanWolf 22:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Useight 21:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Buffy The Vampire Slayer

Description
This WikiProject aims to edit so many Buffy The Vampire Slayer-related articles, and contribute and change them. If this proposal is to become an existing WikiProject, I would like to take credit.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Pokemon Buffy Titan 01:06, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Buffyverse. John Carter 01:25, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cartography Lab

Description
This would be a complement to the Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve, specifically in the creation of maps for the undermapped articles, listed by the hundreds at Category:Wikipedia requested maps
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Chris 06:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Rock on! Thank you! Do I archive this discussion or just remove it? Chris 21:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd remove it, myself, as you indicate there already exists a project dealing with the subject area. John Carter 15:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And perhaps mention the other project in the Talk pages of each as a suggestion that they might be of interest to each other...or of interest to someone looking for the right project for a task. (SEWilco 15:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Cellos

Description
To find and maintain pages about the cello.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. helping make wiki better- dagurlwonder 05:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Celts

Description
This culture, which has influenced literature, farming, navigation and so much of European life, for 4,000 years, and covers places as diverse as Portugal and Asia Minor, would be worthy of its own project. Modern areas still Celtic include Brittany, Cornwall, Ireland, the Isle of Man, Scotland and Wales. For a good illustration of what this project could be, see the project "Projet:Celtes" and the related portal "Celtic World" in the Francophone Wikipedia.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Chris 04:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Malathos 04:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Gwalarn 11:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC) for modern Celtic countries and related issues[reply]
  4. Tle585 16:56, 23 August 2007 (UTC) for creation of a serious, academic discussion of the topics avoiding romantacism and nationalist bias, other than that discussed as an issue in the articles.[reply]
  5. Gabhala 18:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Lurker (talk · contribs)
Comments
  1. Saw your note advertising this. To be honest I am too busy to devote anything other than cursory attention to it at present, but I thought you might be interested in WikiProject Scottish Islands. I toyed with the idea and the advice was that there were probably too few editors to keep it going. Perhaps in the long run there will prove to be the case, but just creating it it seems to have co-ordinated and galvanised support. There are now umpteen project pages, 500 WPSI banners, over 100 infoboxes etc. etc. - and we only started in July. Check it out at WP:ISLE. If you know of at least two other editors keenly interested in your project my suggestion is - just go for it. If it is interesting and dynamic it will attract attention. Good luck. Ben MacDui (Talk) 08:07, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. IMHO, there are 2 subjects : 1. the historical Celtic area and civilization, 2. the revival in the XIXth century, which is still "in progress" (see the recent attitude of Galicia and Asturias in Spain about their Celtic roots). I am more likely (and more competent) to contribute in articles devoted to the modern meaning of the Celtic World. Gwalarn 11:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. I like this idea, but would looking at the confused and frequently innaccurate entry for the Celt page, I will note I am only interested if we can keep this up to a certain level of respectibility --Tle585 16:56, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
reply If you can delineate what specifically the pitfalls and potholes are, together we can come up with standards to either aim for or adhere to, and make that part of the goals of the new Project. Thanks all for what you'll bring to the proverbial table! Chris 02:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  1. I'm involved in othetr stuff, but will try to contribute. Lurker (said · done) 12:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I think the current activity on the talk page of the Celts article, warrants a project page. The implications of redefining "Celt" have a huge impact on more than just that particular page. For example, the "Celtic Christianity" page would be affected profoundly.Gabhala 00:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like there is enough interest to at least set up this group as a task force of some other project. Trying to think of which group would be appropriate is rather difficult, though maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups might come closest. Have you thought of contacting them regarding the possibility of setting up as a task force? John Carter 15:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • You mention Brittany, Cornwall, Ireland, the Isle of Man, Scotland and Wales, but you fail to mention the rest of England. Perhaps you could avoid talking specifically of 'Celts', about whom there is much disagreement, and somehow use the word 'Celtic' instead. One thing there can be no doubt about is that many peoples were certainly influenced by Celtic culture and languages. --Mal 19:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC) (forgot to sign in) 19:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chhattisgarh

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Chhattisgarh.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Colonialism

Description
I have already made a portal for this see Portal:Colonialism now i need to form a group. Its gonna be about imperialism and th scramble for Africa etc.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Leo III
Comments

I thin it would be great see the portal - Portal:Colonialism Leo III 03:16, 17 September 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
  5. User:Avyfain Improved lots of the music of Costa Rica stubs

Comments: It looks like this proposal has enough members to be set up as a task force, probably of Wikipedia:WikiProject Central America. Would the individuals above find that acceptable? John Carter 20:06, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Craft

Description: This project seeks to organise and collate all craft articles. It clashes a bit with WikiProject Textile Arts, and WikiProject Visual Arts but covers things that they don't such as bead and polymer clay. Visual Arts seems to focus on artists rather than media, and textile arts applies only to textiles. There are also lots of specific WikiProjects, such as knots, that could be grouped under this heading. Essesntially, could we have a wiki project that covers everything?

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

I am a lemon 00:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Crown dependencies

Description
This project will deal with content related to the British Crown dependencies of Guernsey, Isle of Man, and Jersey.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 18:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Tra (Talk) 21:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

These articles and areas technically do not fall within the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject United Kingdom, so it may be that creation of a separate project is required. However, I don't think it would be a good idea to rule out the possibility of becoming a task force of some other project. John Carter 18:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a WikiProject would be a possibility. If there aren't enough active editors, another alternative would be to make a task force at Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe. Tra (Talk) 21:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Daft Punk

Description
To maintain all related Daft Punk articles especially the members of the electronic duo. There are many articles regarding Daft Punk and even their own subgenre of music which is French house (which needs clean up as of right now).
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Douglasr007
  2. The Bone III
  3. ShogoFan3000 12:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Now, I know that a task force could be a better idea for this but it seems a lot of people have been helping with the editing of all Daft Punk related articles that a WikiProject could benefit more in the end. Douglasr007 04:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unless I'm missing something: a project and task force serve the same purpose, they both are used to help editors work together on a group of articles. A project is usually for a big scope, a taskforce is usually for a small scope. In the case of Daft Punk: it should be a taskforce for the music project, as it's a small scope. RobJ1981 22:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the topic is broad enough to merit a WikiProject in its name; one would benefit the subject greatly. The Bone III 02:38, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc), or your idea is a variation on a common theme, consider starting a task force of an existing project instead of a whole new WikiProject.I am a lemon 23:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Debate

Description
A project to deal with the subject of debate, and also the more notable historical debates, like the Lincoln-Douglas debate, presidential debates, etc. [description here]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. LDChamp09 02:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

The temporary project page is at User:LDChamp09/WikiProject Debate.

Desperate Housewives

Description
The project's goal is to improve the main article of Desperate Housewives, and to create new articles for the episode list and also to expand the characters articles.

It ios clear to see that most of the D.H pages have a large disorganization especially the character pages and the main page. The best thing is to organizane all these pages in a wikiproject and expand even more the D.H. pages.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. cosmo.vnz 04:12, 06 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Pjär80 08:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. JpGrB
  4. Sfufan2005 01:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheater1908 00:06, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
  • If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc), or your idea is a variation on a common theme, consider starting a task force of an existing project instead of a whole new WikiProject. Chris 08:41, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]



Disabilities, or Disability Studies

Description
A project to cover the many (and often rather ragged) articles on disabling conditions, disability studies, mobility and medical gear, ableism prejudice, and so forth. Organization, completism, and globalization are all needed here. As an example, there is an article on Wheelchair and Mobility scooter, but powered wheelchairs don't have their own article. For globalization - well, the British tend to prefer 'handicapped', whereas the Americans prefer 'disabled' for the most part.

This project could also serve as a useful umbrella for projects on mental illness, learning disabilities, mobility gear, and so forth.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Feyandstrange 11:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Uppitycrip
Comments

I would be willing to moderate or help or develop this project. i would have proposed it myself, but i think it is too large for one wikipedian. But it is EXTREMELY needed.

Dream Anatomy

Description
Just a first line. This effort does not intend to create one more psychologies, mystic, spiritual, nor a dream interpretation site. All those thing are IMHO, lets say, childish, subjective and kind of unhealthy. Sorry for the inconvenience.
The idea is to collect tagged dream narrations, so they would be content-searchable, and categoryzable. Anyone could contribute with a brand new dream or deviations from existing ones, a clear structure hasn't been still designed. Tags should apply to anything appearing in the dream, from emotions to objects that seem relevant to the story in the contributor opinion.
The result would be worth to surf, a delicious piece of human nature, a nice place available for the very first time thanks to a collaborative engine. Common dreams and nightmares would reveal as common, and the relation among their parts may partially unveil an anatomy of dreaming.
Last words were in oratory's sake... Anyone attracted?
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments
  • Can this be a WikiProject under the guise of Wikipedia? It sounds more like you are proposing a new Wiki altogether. If that's the case, there are other forums for such proposals. __meco 12:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for your comment Meco. I'm new to this and therefore a bit lost, and as you say this proposal sounds more like a new wiki. If you could point me the right forums I'd be very grateful. In the while I'll try to find them on my own :)

Duke University

Description
A WikiProject to standardize and improve all articles related to Duke University. The project page would provide a central forum to outline specific important tasks, collect article/photo requests, and improve to GA or FA articles that are essential/pivotal to Duke, while deciding on mergers or deletions for unencylopedic and trivial stubs. While every one of these actions can and are carried out on the individual pages, a Duke WikiProject would, IMO, streamline the whole maintenance/editing/writing process and facilitate greater cooperation and input.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. malachirality (talk · contribs)
Comments

Edgar Allan Poe

Description
A WikiProject devoted to improving articles relating to Edgar Allan Poe, his life, works, and media based upon same. It will also help to maintain the Portal:Edgar Allan Poe.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 18:15, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
It is understood that the scope of this project could be seen to be rather narrow. On that basis, it is expected that this particular group may try to become a subproject of another extant project.


Email

Description
[create an email server so people can have wikimail or email Such as yourname@wikipedia.org or yourname@wikimail.org
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [--Mgeheren 01:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)][reply]
Comments

Equestrian

Description

This WikiProject aims not only to better existing equestrianism related articles, but to create new ones. As a major international sport, events are held each year throughout the world. More articles are needed to communicate this historic sport to Wikipedia readers. This project will cover terms, events, riders, horses, and more. The goal of this project is to act as a sister project to WikiProject Thoroughbred Racing. It will provide guidelines and recommendations for articles relating to equestrianism, be used as a central location of communication when creating new templates, and to overall improve equestrian related articles.

Interested Wikipedians
  1. – Canada Nurmsook! 02:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

WikiProject ER

Description

This would be a WikiProject to maintain, improve, expand upon articles relating to the long running TV series, ER.

Interested Wikipedians
  1. Joshua John Lee
  2. awalrusdarkly
  3. Solo89 (I think we should try to partner up with ER Headquarters)
Comments

Think this one might be too big for a task force so brought it here for discussion. Will try and rally support from common ER editors.

Essex

Description
A project for the county of Essex, England
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Chris 05:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Event venues

Description
This wikiproject will cover all event venues worldwide. This includes arenas, stadiums, exhibition centres, open spaces which hold events and any other venues which may hold notable events. Examples include the Tokyo Dome in Tokyo, Earls Court Exhibition Centre in London, the Staples Center in Los Angeles and Hyde Park in London.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

Tbo 157 11:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Experimental art (Proposed rename “Contemporary music”)

Description (summary)
Project Experimental art would work to improve all pages related to experimental art or artists. This could include concert and popular music, theory (music or visual), literature, dance, theater, film, visual arts, architecture, and performance art.
Description (longer version)
This is a Wikiproject focusing on everything relating to experimental (or avant-garde) in the arts. This project would cover a huge number of some of the most overlooked pages on Wikipedia. Articles like 20th century classical music which is littered with “citation needed” tags, Modernist poetry an article composed of only four sentences, List of atonal pieces which is actually a list of several modern composers, 20th century concert dance which is only a stub, and Experimental theatre which is tagged for “tone not be appropriate for Wikipedia.” The range of Project Modernist art would cover pages describing concepts, techniques or theory’s, art movements, people, works of art, and lists (of artists or works).
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. S.dedalus 00:23, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Freshacconci 00:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Antandrus (talk) 04:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 16:26, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Doktor Who (talk · contribs) 11:40, 04 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I’m thinking that perhaps I should have named this Experimental art to be more specific. . . As for time period, modernism or avant-guard as a philosophy hasn’t been around all that long. Perhaps it would be sufficient simply to define it as any art which is currently considered to contain an experimental element. --S.dedalus 01:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That’s true, I think Experimental art is a better name since this is really about all mediums (I was thinking Modernism. Modernist is wrong.). My way of looking at it is that this could be a subproject of Wikipedia:WikiProject Contemporary Art. Experimental and avant-guard art is a unique form of contemporary art because it is concerned with a philosophy of rejecting old traditions and experimenting with new methods, whereas there are many contemporary artists who focus exclusively on older ideas and styles. I also think there are enough problems with these pages that two projects would not be unnecessary. However, that’s what I’m gauging with this proposal. --S.dedalus 03:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking it over though. :-) --S.dedalus 05:24, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That’s fine by me. Is this consensus then? Wikiproject Contemporary music? --S.dedalus 19:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Description
This project is focused on ensuring that external links have proper descriptions attached to them - that is, instead of cryptic page titles, links should describe their content, and where necessary, the source or stance of the target. Unlike Wikipedia:WikiProject External links, this project is not about the potentially contentious area of adding or removing links, but purely about labelling the content of links correctly and informatively, to prevent conscious or unconscious bias/confusion. Special attention should be paid to high edit/high view articles, and possibly an aim should be to construct a proper set of guidelines for all external links.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Fangz 20:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Scope

According to Wikipedia:Former featured articles, there are over 400 articles that at one time met the Featured article criteria. Many of these were demoted for minor reasons that could easily be fixed by a dedicated group of editors. This project aims to dramatically increase the number of featured articles by first focusing on those former FAs closest to meeting the criteria, and working its way to those in need of more help. This would be done through scheduled collaborations on said articles. While all editors are welcome to join, editors with experience creating FAs, especially those with strong copyediting skills and/or knowledge of MoS are most needed. There is no reason for wikipedia to have any "former" FAs. It should be top priority to maintain them. "Once an FA, always an FA." is the eventual goal of this project.

Members
  1. Wrad 02:58, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Elfalem 18:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC) - I don't really have any experience with FAs but I think it's important that there should be no former FAs so I want to participate in any way that I can.[reply]
  3. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:22, 29 July 2007 (UTC) - I've put up a few FACs so am getting a handle on this.[reply]
  4. Buc 15:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC) Sounds good.[reply]
  5. David Fuchs (talk) 15:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC) - can't argue with that.[reply]
  6. User:Izzy007
  7. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 20:38, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I think the criteria for determining what constitutes an FA may have changed over the years, and that is probably one of the primary reasons for there being so many former FAs. Nevertheless, I would welcome the existence of such a group, even if I, who have trouble doing even Start-Class articles, would be basically useless to it. John Carter 18:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's true, the criteria has changed, so some former FAs are nowhere near close to passing, but several are very close. I was also thinking that this project could be a "rescue squad" for article under FA review. Wrad 14:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that any articles "were demoted for minor reasons that could easily be fixed", but applaud your efforts. Here is a list of articles that may need citation attention. It's not easy to cite someone else's work after the fact, but I wish your Project the best of luck. The Emsworth articles are a good place to start. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:21, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that any articles "were demoted for minor reasons that could easily be fixed", but applaud your efforts. -- I'm getting this from a lot of people, and it's completely untrue. Take a look at Columbine Massacre and The Simpsons, both demoted for minor reasons that could easily be fixed. Quit saying it's impossible but that you applaud our efforts and sign up! Wrad 18:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the offer, but my hands are full trying to salvage featured status at WP:FAR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:08, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A reminder note. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Io (moon) has a reminder I usually put at the top for Raul; if he isn't made aware that an article is an WP:FFA and has already been on the main page (be sure to check), on promotion, he may add it back to WP:FA without noting that it's already been on the main page (I believe this happened with Pluto). Please remember to add this reminder for Raul if you bring any FFAs back to FAC, and to add a link to the FARC, so reviewers can see that all concerns have been addressed. When articles are re-promoted, they are moved to the re-promoted category at the bottom of WP:FFA, the overall tally doesn't change, but the re-promoted tally is incremented. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:08, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One other thing that might work would be to notify the various projects which have an interest in an article that it is a former featured article. Many projects have a section of their project page listing their FAs, GAs, former FAs and GAs, and whatnot. It might be useful to get them a bit more actively involved as well. John Carter 20:59, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There already is a project page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Featured articles which deals with all featured articles, past and present. Maybe you all could do this work within that project. The page could probably use some improvement as well. John Carter 14:34, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frisians

Description
Co-ordinated information about the Frisians, their historical lands, languages, etc.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Benne ['bɛnə] (talk) 19:01, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. A Duck 19:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. -)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 08:06, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Murlock 18:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. icelandic hurricane #12(talk) 14:25, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Stallions2010 23:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • It sounds like fun, this project. I'd love to be a participant all the way up from the beginning. I think Fryslan deserves to have its own project, and I think many people would like to share the same opinion with me! I should say; look at this, tell every Frisian wikipedian that you know, and give this proposal some notice on this great site! Many great Frisians throughout ancient history all the way up to modern times, need to have recognision on wikipedia. People such as Grutte Pier, Ygo Gales Galama, the Galama-family, the Schieringers and Vetkopers, Tierck Hiddes de Vries, and much, much more! Today is the day! Now is the time for us Frisians to combine and create our long-rewaited project! We are standing at the start of something new, something great; Fryslan boppe!

Murlock 09:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps there's enough information for Fryslân to deserve its own project, but I thought it would be nice to combine information about all the Frisians, also in Germany.
Any suggestions for a name? Frisians or Frisia? --Benne ['bɛnə] (talk) 23:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frisians! Absolutely, now doubt about that! And I am very proud of being a member and starter al the way up from the beginning! Your idea is great, Benne, it sure is! Frisians! Our own project! A great thing. I'll be happy to help. Allways, -)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 13:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, a month has passed after your last comments; is there anything going to happen? Is anyone going to create this project? Frisians, when is your project gonna be started up! Or is this just empty talking and no acting? I'd like to see some action taken here, okay! Otherwise, I don't think there will be any project for Frisians. At all. And that would be a bloody shame, since the Frisians are a great people who deserve to have there own group of organised editors, taking care of there historical, culteral, and etnical-related articles. 84.87.138.105 08:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Wikiproject future management

A project in which manages wikipedia articles on events that are yet to come, or are in the future. Involves referencing the articles, working on them, keeping the content on the event that is to happen very accurate, and having articles removed that violates WP:CRYSTAL, a genius and simple project. Articles managed will be articles on upcoming, television series, books, newspapers, and articles on years in the future such as 2200, 2300 etc . Francisco Tevez 20
46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments



Global Warming

In the last few decades, the Earth's average temperature has gone up by 1 degree. This may not sound like much but is taking a toll on our environment. Over 80% of our glaciers are now gone. The main goal of this project will be to expand the number of articles related to global warming itself and informing the average person of what would happen by relating the warming in everyday topics. Anyone else interested?

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. ALK
  2. Psdubow
  3. Swannie
  4. Mgeheren
  5. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)
Comments

Great idea! I would be willing to help. I think maybe we should team up with the Wikiproject Environment on this and they some of the members might be willing to help us. Psdubow

Possibly. Let's see what they would think of it. Meanwhile, I'm still waiting to see if anyone else is interested. ALK

Sure. You're right, we should probably wait, you know, until some more users get on board. Please keep me posted! Psdubow 00:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will do! ALK

Note that there WikiProject climate change already exists; you may like to take a look at their scope. Gralo 21:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Outstanding Idea I am in!!!! --Mgeheren 17:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good, we've got quite a good amount of people interested now. As for as WikiProject climate change, I've noticed that tehri goals are entirely different from what I have in mind. I guess it's time to start the project. ----ALK 22:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gorillaz

Description
The articles related to Gorillaz are a mess. The band members pages sound like they are written by rabid fangirls, and the singles contain irrelevant trivia.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

The Swagga

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 20:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! I don't know much about Wikiprojects. That suggestion was very helpful. The Swagga 19:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Guitar Tunings

Description: This WikiProject would help create and improve articles that relate to guitar tunings and ways to tune a guitar. It would work on ways to tune a guitar and it would expand and improve the articles that relate to tuning a guitar.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

  1. Mezmerizer

Comments

I think that this proposal would be better as a task force since the coverage of info is so narrow. --ALK 21:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it belongs in Wikipedia:WikiProject Musical Instruments if anywhere. Wikipedia is not a how-to. Chris 21:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gymnastics

Description
There are many articles that are within the scope of gymnastics. I'm kind of surprised there isn't one already. I am also considering adding cheerleading because it is similar.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Maddie was here 23:49, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. DanielEng 03:58, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I wouldn't propose a cheerleading WikiProject – instead, let this WikiProject cover it. The scope for cheerleading isn't very large to gain its own WikiProject. Sebi [talk] 06:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]



Homeschooling

Signing up & Commenting

To sign and comment go to the home page. Do not sign up and comment here.

User:EvanS/WikiProject Homeschooling/Comments and Participants


Hominids

Description
This project will be a subfamily of Wikiproject Primates. It would include The species, the discoverers and the theories about them.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Kfc1864 23:20, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary project page
User:Kfc1864/Wikiproject Hominids
Comments

House, M.D.

Description
A WikiProject for the show House, M.D. Although there are a lot of pages for the show, I feel as though we could really improve the overall quality of the episode synopses and the such with a dedicated group of people. Right now, there is no continuity between pages and I feel that we really need to rectify this.
Interested Wikipedians
  1. Allison Stillwell
  2. mirageinred 06:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Maddie was here 19:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Docta247 16:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. ShogoFan3000 12:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • As the note at the top states: 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.. RobJ1981 05:56, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • The television show Heroes has its own WikiProject and it's only been on for one season. House has been on for three seasons and therefore has a much wider pool of information to dive into. If you feel that House doesn't merit its own WikiProject, then what WikiProject do you feel that it would fit under, oh guru? Allie 15:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • In general, it is agreed though that when the scope of a proposed project specifically already falls within the scope of another project, in this case Wikipedia:WikiProject Television, that it both reduces the amount of talk page clutter and redundant activity to take advantage of the existing infrastructure of the larger project. The fact that some well meaning individuals create an entirely separate project, some of which wind up being moribund fairly fast, is no really good reason to copy them in that regard. John Carter 17:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would love to start Wikiproject House! Maybe it should not have M.D? It's officially called House. I think that this Wikiproject can cover a lot. There are many House episodes and even more as they kick off the fourth season. A lot of the pages need work. Some of them are too short or have plot summaries that are way too long. There's the House article itself and the House characters. I hear that more characters will be introduced for the next season. It's a big yes for me. mirageinred 06:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would definitely participate. I love that show. It does have a lot of related articles too.Maddie was here 19:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Generally I would agree that there are enough episodes and character pages etc to merit it's own wikiproject. I would in fact join if I had seen more of the programme, though being in the UK have not seen all the seasons yet. AndrewJDTALK -- 20:47, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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]
  3. K. Lásztocska 05:42, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Hobartimus 10:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. KissL 13:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Hunting

Description
A project to unite all articles on hunting, including shooting, fox hunting, wildfowling, etc, some of which are currently of a high standard whereas others are in need of a cleanup. Also, a series of articles of "Hunting in [insert country]", as has been started with Hunting in the United Kingdom and Hunting in Russia could be helped by this project.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Greenfinch100 16:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indiana Jones

Description
A project covering all articles related to Indiana Jones, including films, games, comics, characters, locations, clothing, firearms, vehicles, etc. etc.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
  2. Chris 10:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

This may be broad enough of scope to work, but shouldn't you sign your own suggestion? Chris 10:02, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think that maybe expanding the scope out a little might be a good idea. Perhaps a project on the works of Lucas and Spielberg, individually or collectively, barring Star Wars which already has its own project, might be preferable as many of the individuals associated with Indiana Jones probably are relevant to some of those two gentlemen's other work as well. John Carter 18:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Independence

Description
It would encopass events, biographies, etc. related to Indian Independence. Mainly, it would try to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Indian Independence.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Psdubow 13:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Indigenous Australia

Description : This Wikproject would cover everything related to Indigenous Australians, past and present.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

  1. Ptcamn 05:37, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. WikiTownsvillian 07:09, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Garrie 04:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • would favour using the title Indigenous Australia or Indigenous Australians, but no biggy. WikiTownsvillian 07:09, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, either works. --Ptcamn 07:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • would think that you would need to use Indigenous Australians if your intention is to improve the quality of articles about the various people, their history, their culture. Gnangarra 12:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    I would like to think that if everything being put into an article is referenced from a reliable source then the gender, race, nationality and religion of the contributor are irrelevant. For example: if I am going to ensure all suburb articles include population statistics regarding self-identified ATSI residents then why does it matter what race I am? Same with assessing articles for quality and a lot of other housekeeping kind of matters. And looking at some articles - attachment to a topic can get in the way of maintaining NPOV, and ensuring only verifiable information is included.Garrie 06:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This would seem to be a good candidate for a task force or workgroup within Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian history. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 13:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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, GRU, 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)
  2. Perseus282 (talk · contribs)
  3. meco (talk · contribs)
  4. Indoles (talk · contribs)
  5. Ttturbo (talk · contribs)
  6. Saranghae honey (talk · contribs)
Comments

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Intelligence Agency, which already covers most of this subject. John Carter 19:00, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


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]
  7. Fullstop 08:52, 1 June 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]
    • Given that WikiProject Religion is not a large project in terms of members or frequency of postings to its forum. Suggest having one and only one place where issues of concern affecting other religions can be addressed. Not all Wikipedians interested in religion are also interested in inter-religion issues. Having multiple small and specialized task forces to address various sub-concerns would likely confuse general editors, who wouldn't know where to take a concern to, could lead to overlapping forums for the same issues, and could exclude essential points of view, resulting in administrative POV forks with folks of particular views coalescing into particular groups. Right now WikiProject religion, while not moribund, doesn't have such a large amount of activity as a forum for discussion of issues to make subdivision practical. Best, --Shirahadasha 16:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Could the proposers of this project identify a single specific example of a problem that such a proposal could solve and why this approach could solve it better than present methods? Currently each religion more or less has autonomy over its own issues, with cooperation on obvious joing articles like Abraham and Bible. How would the proposed approach create an improvement? Best, --Shirahadasha 16:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Saint contains material relevant to a variety of religions, but is to date tagged with the banners of few if any of them, leaving the remaining content handled by people who could easily misstate something. Also, there will be specific cases where, from for example my field of saints, a statement regarding the subject's previous religious affiliation, which might be non-Christian, could be stated in sources in a way which is less than completely clear in sources. This might be particularly relevant if that religion has no specific attendant WikiProject, and a lot of faiths qualify in that area. It would also allow for editors who are primarily interested in a given faith, which may or may not have its own separate project, to address these religion-specific matters, without also having to deal with articles dealing with Santeira, Bahai, and some of the other specific religions the parent project deals with. John Carter 17:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jammu and Kashmir

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan, and/or Wikipedia:WikiProject China, to work on articles relating to the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. User:toprohan
Comments


Jharkhand

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Jharkhand.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Jimi Hendrix

Description
This project seeks to improve upon the current Jimi Hendrix information available, in a few specific ways:

1. Get the page up to featured article status (has been rejected before) 2. Expand the information on the non-musical cultural impact of Hendrix 3. Incorporate more knowledge on the vast catalogue of Hendrix's unreleased works.

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

Kensington Court Gardens

Description
[Kensington Court Gardens is a large, late Victorian mansion block, completed in 1889, near

to Kensington Palace and Gardens. Despite its plain, red brick exterior, it has been home to one of the greatest poets of the 20th century. Kensington Court Gardens is most famously the residence of poet, critic and playwright, Thomas Stearns Eliot – T.S. Eliot. Eliot moved to No.3 Kensington Court Gardens in 1957, after his secret marriage to his secretary from Faber and Faber, (Esmé) Valerie Fletcher on the 10th January 1957. The marriage was criticised not only because it was kept a secret from all, but her parents, but at the time Eliot was 68 and Valerie only 30 years old. Despite the criticism and the age difference, it appears to have been the happiest time of Eliot’s life, the Oxford Dictionary of Biography stating he “attained a degree of contentedness that had eluded him all his life.” However, at the time Eliot’s health was already in decline and he died in the flat only eight years later, on the 4th January 1965. Mrs Valerie Eliot still lives at No.3 Kensington Court Gardens and is editor and guardian over his letters, many of which are still un-published. Another notable resident is The Kopman family, who have made their money in the property development and investment banking arenas. The location of today’s Kensington Court Place was formerly part of the Vallotton estate, dating back to the late 18th century. Kensington Court Place was originally known as Charles Street and renamed in 1908. The eastern side of Charles Street was the former site of open grounds, known as The Paddock. It was the home of the Kensington Lawn Tennis Club prior to being bought by local surveyor, Albert James Barker for building development in 1886. The mansion block, Kensington Court Gardens is believed to be designed by Henry W. Peck and built by Frederick Moir of Moir, Wallis and Company in 1887-9 in association with Albert Barker. Albert Barker was responsible for a large amount of the building development around Thackeray Street, Ansdell Street and Kensington Court Place and was responsible for much of the street layout that we see today. The Times first advertised flats for Kensington Court Gardens in January 1889 at between £195 and £250 per annum. Kensington Court Gardens first appears in the London Directory in 1889, listed with Moir Wallis & Co. Builders, with building works not completed. The first residents appear in the 1890 Directory, with flat No.1 again, with Moir Wallis & Co. Interestingly, during the 1890s a number of residents of Kensington Court Gardens are retired military men. The 1891 census shows residents General Alexander Silver, Lieutenant-Colonel Arnold Knight and Major- General James Black. The 1901 census and Royal Blue Book show other notable residents, including the builder Frederick Moir at No.7 and publisher Herbert Doubleday at No.9. Doubleday was responsible for the publishing of the Victoria History of the Counties of England and The Complete Peerage. Flat No.1 Kensington Court Gardens was originally the home of the building caretaker, listed in the 1891 census as Mr Charles Hall with his wife Emily. The 1901 census shows No.1 as the home of James E. Raybould, Hall Porter, with his wife Elizabeth. Sources: Melania Backe-Hansen]

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

Language education

Description
The scope of this WikiProject includes any current or prospective articles related to education related to second language acquisition. Beyond the scope of general information on language education, related articles include, but are not limited to, those dealing with language teaching pedagogy (in theory/research and in practice), employment in language education, as well as programs, organizations and schools dealing with language education.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Roehl Sybing 17:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • The rationale for this proposal is that I have yet to see an organized collaboration in an area that I believe certainly needs one. First, many related articles are edited and contributed to by non-native English speakers. Their contribution is most certainly welcome, but articles in this case still need to be assessed for style and syntax, to say nothing of NPOV. Second, certain important discussions need to take place regarding the prospective re-organization of a number of articles that may be too broad in scope or require merging with other articles. Third, linkspam and even articles inappropriately pointing to websites or resources not necessary for reference have run rampant in this area (Teaching English as a foreign language is a vulnerable target for linkspam to ESL websites, and at least a few articles for ESL websites and schools have been deleted in the past for non-notability). To these and other concerns, a major effort is necessary to improve the quality of articles that fall under the scope of language education. --Roehl Sybing 17:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last of the Summer Wine

Description
Every article to do with Last of the Summer Wine
Interested Wikipedians --82.39.96.49 16
01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
  1. --82.39.96.49 16:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Expressing interest

Latrobe Valley

Description
This project would aim to give the Latrobe Valley better coverage on wikipedia. It would cover articles about towns in the aread Moe, Victoria, Morwell, Victoria Traralgon, Victoria Yallourn North, Victoria the latrobe valley article, and many others related to the latrobe valley. I feel that with a project related to the Latrobe Valley, wikipedians will be able to gain a greater understanding about the valley.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. ClEeFy
  2. celebraces
Comments

Law & Order

Description
This project would focus on Law & Order and all of the spin-offs like: Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, Law & Order: Criminal Intent, and Law & Order: Trial by Jury. Some areas of the Project would be: episode data and order, character information and updates, news and currents events, information about cast members, creating templates, organizing information, expanding articles, and creating a comprehensive and detailed guide to the Franchise in general on Wikipedia. Psdubow 23:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Psdubow
  2. Tha D-O-Z
  3. J.P. Casey
  4. Bernstein2291
  5. Saranghae honey (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 20:13, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you are right. But, this is just to see if anyone would be interested in joining. Psdubow 20:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm definitely interested in this. --DodgerOfZion 06:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great! But, I'd like to wait for a few more people to be on-board before we create it though. Psdubow 15:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think this a good idea for a project. I'll be in! JpGrB 03:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Love this show. With many spin-off shows and numerous seasons, this project should be able to cover a great deal of articles. mirageinred 19:24, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Lead Paragraph Cleanups

Description

The problem of lengthy 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

Note: Frummer seems to have checked out for a while; last posting was 23 August. Someone else want to take the lead on this? -- John Broughton (♫♫) 18:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about you, John? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 22:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've got other major Wikipedia-related commitments in the next two months; if someone else hasn't done this by then, then maybe. (Sorry). -- John Broughton (♫♫) 12:44, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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]
  7. Random Nonsense 15:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Hydrogen Iodide
  9. John Broughton 13:47, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. ArcayneArcayne (cast a spell)
  11. ( arky )

Agree to the opposite

  1. (May I?) Bad, underweight leads are (IMO) the greater problem. I will certainly participate in a group meant to expand leads. Marskell 22:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

M*A*S*H

Description
This project would be to further expand the M*A*S*H franchise. Possibly help expand the characters, add more episodes, and not have them in the red links, and the movie and books.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. J.P. Casey
  2. Mikecraig
  3. Chris 06:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Sarsaparilla39
  5. Skeeter451 my contributions my talk page
  6. Voyagerfan5761
  7. 60 Delta 21:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Okay, now this is a TV project I can get behind, one that has staying power for a decade of shows and 35 years of cultural influence. support. Chris 06:24, 4 June 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

Madhya Pradesh

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Malware

Description
I've noticed that many, if not most, articles on malware are very poorly worded and written. I know a thing or two about Wiki markup, and can write fairly well, so if anyone would like to help. Thanks :) *Zeratul grins insanely. Zeratul En Taro Adun!So be it. 01:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Zeratul En Taro Adun!So be it.
Comments
You also posted to Wikipedia:New contributors' help page#A question on WikiProjects and Wikipedia:Help desk#WikiProject Malware? within 30 minutes. I will copy my reply:
Are you aware of Wikipedia:WikiProject Malware? It appears inactive but trying to revive it may be the best. PrimeHunter 02:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Manipur

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Manipur.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Maquahuitl 11:24, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments


Meghalaya

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Meghalaya.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Milton Keynes

Description
This WikiProject aims to cover all articles connected to Milton Keynes
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. SeveroTC 15:48, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Concrete Cowboy 16:50, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Zorro77 19:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Neostinker 19:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)]][reply]
Comments

Parent WikiProjects:

SeveroTC 22:45, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mining

Description
This WikiProject aims to improve the quality and organization of mining related articles.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Kelapstick
  2. Djoeyd114
  3. Plazak
  4. Clinchfield
  5. Rolinator
Comments

The mining pages in particular are poorly treated from an organisational viewpoint and are very poorly interlinked and at least in my mind are often heavily biased toward green anti-mining points of view (and charitably putting it, that point of view is over-represented). I think this is a project which geologists, engineers and even drillers should help keep updated.Rolinator 06:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mizoram

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Mizoram.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Mobile Phones

Description : This WikiProject would be for the improvement and standardisation of Mobile Phone articles. Many of the existing 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]
  3. User:Mathiastck
  4. OhanaUnitedTalk page
  5. Mange01 07:59, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Solidsnake204 Talk ~ Contribs 16:33, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Figarema 19:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Which boxes do you propose ?. --HybridBoy 11:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The category is thriving: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mobile. Mathiastck 01:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This one looks like it can take off any moment. I'll sign up for this. OhanaUnitedTalk page 10:28, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See also this talk to merge the category
Pleases also see the extant Wikipedia:WikiProject Cellular Devices. John Carter 20
47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Modernist art: See Experimental art above.

Mongolia

Description
This WikiProject would be for the improvement and development of Mongolia and Mongolian language-related articles. Mongolia-related articles are currently in WikiProject:Central Asia, and if they have their own WikiProject, I'm positive that it will contribute to the expansion of Mongolia-related articles.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. --ChinneebMy talk 14:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Chris 07:44, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Also check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Central Asia. Chris 07:44, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Museums

Description
I am surprised there is not at present a WikiProject tying together these repositories of the world's knowledge, and there needs to be.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Chris 07:44, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Nagaland

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Nagaland.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments


Nautical Project

Description
I have noticed there is no broad parent Nautical project. The idea has been very briefly discussed at Portal:Nautical. There seem to be areas that are falling through the cracks, like say, Sailing which is really just outside several projects, doesn't fall under Ships except for a limited portion of the historical aspects and the tall ships still afloat, "small craft" in general which are on the margins of Maritime Trades as so many are now purely recreational, Historical Novels like the Aubrey-Maturin series series and the Hornblower Series which are not top of the list at Novels Project or their authors which are in the same situation at Biographies Project. Both could use more attention. Most of these areas have little coverage or very few editors and need information and badly need sources. A few, like Sailing, appear to have gotten out of control and could probably stand a few new editors to at least comment on how things might be brought back into focus as an Encyclopedia. This would be a general parent project but with a primary intent of covering all those areas that the current active projects don't? Certainly not intended to step on the toes of those who are working hard on talking about military vessels, merchant shipping topics, or other things that are clearly within existing projects.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. --Doug.(talk • contribs) 23:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Newspapers

Description
[A WikiProject devoted to the coverage of newspapers around the world.]
Interested Wikipedians (-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 17
39, 5 July 2007 (UTC) - I'm not actually very interested in such a WikiProject, but I thought it should exist.)
  1. DodgerOfZion
  2. Psdubow 13:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I'd be interested in helping out with this. --DodgerOfZion 18:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe connected to WikiProject Journalism? Chris 10:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oasis (band)

Description
[Many of the Oasis Pages need major fixes]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Bobo6balde66
  2. Play Brian Moore
  3. Rocket000
Comments
The popular English rock n' roll band.--Play Brian Moore 20:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc), or your idea is a variation on a common theme, consider starting a task force of an existing project instead of a whole new WikiProject. Chris 10:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We could set up a taskforce over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music if enough people are interested. We've already got Be Here Now to FA status in the past month. WesleyDodds 04:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I definitely think this should be a task force and not a whole new project. Just look at this week's collaboration on Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music. - Rocket000 05:03, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oceanography

Description
WikiProject Oceanography would serve the need for improvement of current and creating missing articles related to oceanography. It also will standardize articles under the auspices of the project. Additionally, it should help recruit collaborators and increase exposure for interested editors to contribute. Similar projects are Meteorology, Tropical cyclones, and Climate change.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Evolauxia 21:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Quizimodo 23:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. SatuSuro 02:00, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Thegreatdr 18:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Plumbago 13:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Oceanographic articles are currently lacking and is one of the few major physical sciences that dos not have a WikiProject. The main oceanography article is currently under the ausspices of WikiProject Geography and related articles are within various projects but often are not in any.

  • I am not sure if it is appropriate for the proposed project - if the legal/political aspect of ocean definition was standardised on wikipedia it would be excellent - but a huge number of edit wars, and incorrect usage of totally out of date or inadequate sources pollute articles with xxx is in yy ocean - when they are not - from old or badly created atlases and info sources - if it was possible to have adequate template reference points for ascertaining ocean nomenclature for the planet - then for me that alone would justify a project that might have such a section/template/standard by which to battle what appears to be very geographically challenged misinformation. SatuSuro 02:05, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • My primary background is in physical oceanography, however, I see no reason why the above wouldn't be encompassed by the project; on the contrary, it seems it's something a project is a good way to address, something that projects are particularly useful for. Evolauxia 13:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Oceanography, where project was created. John Carter 19:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oncology

Description
This would be under the broader auspices of WP:MED, along the lines of WP:RENAL and WP:Rads. It would address standard of care and best practices in surgical, medical, and radiation oncology, along with maintaining and editing cancer related articles.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Djma12 (talk) 23:04, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Arcadian 01:26, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Many oncology articles are decent, but the topic area could use a more coordinated approach to both "conventional" and alternative medical approaches. My sense is that people get a fair amount of information on this topic from Wikipedia, so it would be worth putting in the effort. MastCell Talk 02:16, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  1. Both WP:RENAL and WP:Rads are inactive, or close to it. Better coordination could be a good thing, but I would do it under WP:CLINMED. Cancer care is very much a team effort. --Una Smith 14:35, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. I am unconvinced there are enough Wikipedians to make this project worthwhile; it may be better to integrate it into Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine. However if your group gathers support, please let me know. Axl 07:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Count me in.--Dr.michael.benjamin 03:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orissa

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Orissa.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Ottoman Empire

Description
A project to centralize work on articles related to the Ottoman Empire.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Hemlock Martinis 06:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Deliogul 08:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Hiberniantears 21:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. OwenBlacker (Talk) 08:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Why would this not fall under the existing WP:Turkey as a workgroup? Chris 09:45, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, it would be nice if we have a specialized squad to work on Ottomans. This is not just about the main article of the empire. It is also about the rulers (Sultans, Askeris etc.), social structure and events, culture and war history. Turkey project can be more effective if we take the responsibility of six centuries from their shoulders. Then they can work on present day issues and modern structure of Turkey. By the way, we can reach this goal by creating a specialized team under the Wikiproject Turkey if people want it that way. Deliogul 13:21, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A specialized WikiProject would assist us greatly in focusing on the Ottoman topics and coordinating our efforts towards improving them. This would not be accomplished as easily within the framework of the Turkish project, and we would be doing them a disservice by distracting them from their improvements while we try to conduct ours. --Hemlock Martinis 19:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a great idea, and one that will benefit the article, and its branch topics tremendously. As for the WP:Turkey suggestion, I think a differentiated Ottoman project is the way to go. Looking over both Turkey and Ottoman Empire you will see that the edit history of both articles contains numerous disputes wherein editors cannot make the distinction between an Ottoman timeline (and definition), and a Republic of Turkey timeline. Hiberniantears 17:25, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There already is an extant Wikipedia:WikiProject Former countries, which already has a few task forces dedicated to individual countries. I think they may be receptive to taking this group on as a task force if the degree of interest justifies it. John Carter 17:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe this is a good idea, and I hope the existence of this project – whether on its own or as a subproject or task force of WikiProject Former countries – will contribute to attracting quality editors for this important area. Some form of liaison with WikiProject History also seems in order. (I'm not listing myself above because I do not have access to the kind of sources needed for an active role, but I'll be happy to copy edit what I see can be improved, and perhaps from time to time signal problems I spot.)  --Lambiam 23:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I definitely think this is a good idea. There's no reason people from WP:Turkey (and WP:WPFC) can't join in on such a WikiProject, after all. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 08:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OS Development

Description
A project to create a clear and concise set of articles on computer operating systems
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

Jatos 09:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I been looking around some of the operating system articles, I would say a lot of them could do with some serious work. I know this is already covered in the scope of the an existing wikiproject on computing, but I think it could do with its own WikiProject, owing to the amount of information people might want to know on operating systems and their development, and the fact this is a fairly specialist area. Also operatinhg systems are fairly important thing in the modern world that really do make the modern world go round, on the grounds that they are essential for computers to operate, and computers are key to our modern life. Jatos 09:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am only an occasional editor with OS stuff, more so Radio & TV Broadcasting. I will probably not be of much help, as current pages seem OK. Eyreland 02:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peanuts

Description
I propose a project concerning the work of Charles Schulz, particularly Peanuts.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Faithlessthewonderboy 23:51, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Wikipedia:WikiProject Comic strips, though not very active right now, covers pretty much all the same territory. Maybe it could be made a task force and, maybe, help revitalize the parent project? John Carter 22:43, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. Since there doesn't seem to be any interest, perhaps I'll look into that. I personally feel that a WikiProject is justified for Peanuts, as it was the longest running and most popular comic strip of all time, and there are plenty of articles on Peanuts on WP. But if the interest isn't there, what can one do? :P Thanks for the suggestion! :) faithless (speak) 01:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Considering school is just starting, I'd wait a bit before saying there's no interest, and definitely still keep the proposal here. John Carter 17:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Requests

Description: Make it easier to find articles needing photographs by sorting and categorizing requests in Category:Wikipedia requested photographs.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

  1. Tim Pierce

Project page User:Twp/Drafts/WikiProject Photo Requests

Comments:

Pittsburgh Pirates

Description
A group of dedicated Pittsburgh Pirates fans focus on the expansion of current and historic items spanning Pirates history.
Interested wikipedians (please add your name below)
Comments

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)
  8. dogman15 02:24, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Erik20202 11:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Useight 21:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
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 definitely 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]
The project is now active at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals/Pocket pets work group. John Carter 15:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Politics of Northern Ireland

Description
A project to develop the coverage of Northern Irish politics. The project would work alongside Wikipedia:WikiProject Irish Republicanism and the proposed Unionism WikiProject, on articles where there is overlap with one or both. In addition to expanding our coverage of this field, it could potentially focus on promoting discussion and locating reliable sources.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. — Warofdreams talk 19:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. — --Padraig 19:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. — --Valenciano 18:33, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. — --Traditional unionist 14:58, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

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 below)
  1. — dkatten 16:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. — Sholom 17:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. — --Uncle Ed 19:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. — Kylesandell 05:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. — Psdubow 13:57, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Potentially interested Wikipedians with suggested changes to the proposal:

(Please make a brief and numbered (#) suggested alteration and sign-- see the comments for discussion of proposed changes.)

  1. Consider basing the project only on widely-accepted past political scandals. Ukulele 06:06, 26 July 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 don't have time to do this now so someone else please take charge. Remember 15:31, 1 June 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]

I feel that focusing only on widely-accepted past political scandals may satisfy the POV issues discussed here. Published history has its own process of peer review. The humble and well-intentioned Wikipedian has a better chance of avoiding the specter of POV with the judgment of history and the reputation of its authors on the other end of the scale. I would feel better about signing my name to this proposal if the author removed "current" from the description and added "past" or "widely-accepted" to the title. Ukulele 05:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pop music

Description
A WikiProject for focusing on all forms of pop music (not to be confused with popular music). Within its scope would be mainstream and indie pop music; regional scenes such as J-pop, K-pop, and C-pop; and pop standards. I think a WikiProject would be quite helpful since the state of our pop articles is currently not that great, and many of the articles are incredibly listy without real information on the songs (see a recent example). ShadowHalo 23:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. ShadowHalo
  2. Underneath-it-All
  3. Ericorbit
  4. Acalamari
  5. Psdubow
Comments

This sounds like a nice idea, but I'm worried that the genre- and artist-specific music WikiProjects may be taking away from the centralised efforts at WP:WP MUSIC, WP:ALBUM and WP:SONG to improve Wikipedia's coverage of music. I do think that pop music articles tend to be poorer — often significantly so — than others, though. Extraordinary Machine 13:53, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MUSIC, WP:MUSICIAN, WP:ALBUM, and WP:SONG are already great resources for music articles. For this project, I was thinking along the lines of Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music, which seems to be a pretty effective collaboration. Obviously there's no point in duplicating the information at WP:ALBUM and WP:SONG. But it'd be good to have a more focused noticeboard of sorts. WP:MN isn't always very responsive to posts, so it would be good to have one tailored to some of the issues that pop music articles face. I've seen a lot of inflation of sales figures and chart positions; unsourced articles predicting next singles (at this point, nearly every song from The Sweet Escape has had an article); very, very listy articles with little information about the song itself; and POV, gushing prose that sounds like it comes from fansites. It seems like it'd be a good idea to have some users that could keep an eye on these things when they come up. 17Drew 19:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pregnancy and childbirth

Description

Articles on pregnancy and childbirth are surprisingly lacking in both quality and quantity. I've been working on them a bit, but could use help. Many topics are not clinical or entirely clinical in nature and tend to be neglected by other hard-working projects such as WP:MED. I am not sure if it would be better to create a task force within WP:MED or a full-fledged WikiProject. I have created a couple of draft pages in my user space (sample project page, navigation template). --Ginkgo100talk 15:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians
  1. Ginkgo100talk
  2. Ferrylodgetalk
  3. Kuronuetalk
  4. epetersotalk
Comments


Project Management

Description
Wikipedia:WikiProject Business and Economics is too large to focus on articles related to project management. This project would cover general topics of project menagement as well as some specific applications in construction, engineering, defense, and IT.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Solarapex - Project organization.
  2. GageParker - IT projects especially ERP
Comments

Psychopathic Records

Description
This project would help to organize and expand the artists, releases, etc. of Psychopathic Records. I have been looking at the pages, and have worked on some, and they are very unorganized.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. JpGrB
Comments

Rajasthan

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Rajasthan.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Record labels

Description
This WikiProject would help clean up, create, and organize articles about record labels. There are currently many articles that need to be cleaned up/created.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Izzy007
Comments


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 definition 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]

Restaurants in India

Description
This wikiproject would focus on creating restaurants info wikipages ,located in India.These restaurants are grouped location wise.We focus on only popular restaurants.
Interested Wikipedians (Please add your name)

--Maveesh 05:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

No. Wikipedia is not a directory, and not a place for adverts. Chris 23:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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
Very good idea, but it is not completely correct that these events didn't accomplish anything; Denmark got its constitution (and a war) as a result of them. Valentinian T / C 17:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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
  2. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!)
  3. futurebird 02:44, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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]
  5. User:Hailey C. Shannon
  6. Voyagerfan5761 21:45, 14 October 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]

Help in creating a Russian rock WikiProject

I would like to create a Russian rock WikiProject. I'm shure it's needed, because we have some of the greatest bands in Russian rock not having articles, or having lame articles, and with the use of WikiProject we could make a list of articles needing references, or expansion, or the list of articles needed to be created, and in that way those who want to help here will see exacly what to do. Could someone here please explain me how do i do it by steps? How do i create the project? How do i create the template? Hope somebody will help me here. M.V.E.i. 11:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SCUBA

See also

WikiProject SCUBA

Related Categories
Related Pages
Scuba divingScuba Schools InternationalNAUIPADI
RebreatherEnriched Air NitroxHelioxSaturation diving
Technical divingDiving Unlimited InternationalDiving regulatorDecompression sickness
Altitude divingAqua-lungDiving equipmentDiver training
Diving activitiesDiving hazards and precautionsDiving locationsDiving physics
Diving signalDiving SuitDrift divingSea Hunt
SnorkelingSnorkeling locationsSnubaTimeline of underwater technology
Underwater photographyUnderwater videographyWreck divingLike-A-Fish
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

1.Gr0ff - 21 Sept 2007 (CT)
2.Yegor Chernyshev - 2 October 2007
3.Anthony Appleyard 16:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
4.Michagal: 15 October 2007.
5.
6.

Existing templates
Interest UserboxesAgency-related Userboxes
This user enjoys scuba diving.
This user is a certified scuba diver.
This user is a certified scuba diver
This user is interested in
Underwater diving, and the
History of underwater diving
This user enjoys snorkeling.
NAUIThis user is a certified NAUI diver.
Template:SSI Diver
Template:PADI Diver
Template:CMAS Diver
Project-related Templates
{{diving-stub}}Template:Diving-stub
{{WPSCUBA}}
WikiProject iconUnderwater diving NA‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is part of WikiProject Underwater diving, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve Underwater diving-related articles to a feature-quality standard, and to comprehensively cover the topic with quality encyclopedic articles.Underwater divingWikipedia:WikiProject Underwater divingTemplate:WikiProject Underwater divingUnderwater diving articles
NAThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Comments

Please add comments to show mutual interest

Sikkim

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Sikkim.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Skateboarding

Description
Skateboarding is one of the most popular sports and considering this, it is surprising that most articles related to skateboarding are currently in bad shape. User:Liface had proposed a wikiproject for skateboarding a year ago but he is not that active here anymore. This project would cover all aspects of skateboarding from tricks to companies having to do with skateboards.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. --Hdt83 Chat
  2. --KoRnholio8
  3. --Vlaze
Comments

Update: There is an already existing project at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Skateboarding. Unfortunately it is inactive, so we can start from there and improve it. --Hdt83 Chat 01:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Skyscrapers

Description
This project would focus on improving, expanding, and maintaining all high-rise and skyscraper-related articles, including all "List of tallest buildings in CITYNAME" articles. Currently, all of this information is covered under the umbrella topic of architecture. But due to the building booms occurring in cities across the world and the very famous buildings that have already been constructed, this deserves its own project. Rai-me 20:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Raime (talk · contribs)
  2. Hydrogen Iodide (talk · contribs)
  3. Huang7776 (talk · contribs)
  4. Sahmeditor (talk · contribs)
Comments

When founded, there should be a building list and article maintenance task force. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 18:16, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eventually, of course. But this probably will not occur until sometime after the project has been created and established. Rai-me 19:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a hastily-made temporary page here. Æetlr Creejl 02:41, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Small Engines

Description This Wikiproject will focus on things to do with small engines, the history thereof, and important innovations in small engines technology.--Gp75motorsports 13:50, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Page: Fledgeling WikiProject Small Engines (I am the Flegeling, apply here!)

Interested Wikipedians

  1. Sbacle (talk · contribs)

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:

That's So Raven

Description
I am a huge fan of the TV show That's So Raven (2003-2007). I have noticed that a lot of the episodes do not have pages. I, however, would have enough plot information (along with other interested Wikipedians) to create these pages. Also, we would work on character pages and actor pages.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. *silver*► 21:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments>

That is to narow, you may want it to be a workgroup with in the TV wikiproject.Phoenix741 21:29, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, too narrow.--Gp75motorsports 15:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thrash Metal

Description
Thrash Metal is a genre of Heavy Metal music that has seen some levels of mainstream popularity, and as a result there are a lot of bands of this genre. As in, hundreds more (notable) than are listed. I would say that a Thrash Metal WikiProjected is warranted to have full focus on the Thrash Metal article, as well as all related articles, within reason.

Purposes of this group are as follows, but not limited to:

  • Add/Create new articles related to notable bands/artists under the thrash metal category.
  • Revamp some articles relating to notable bands/artists completely (where need be, of course).
  • Patrol the articles in question "constantly" to make sure that they aren't vandalized bit by bit to the point where they're filled with false information or deceptive links.

This has been suggested many times before, and I think that all articles relating to Thrash Metal would definitely benefit from this. The WikiProject for Heavy Metal would be pointed out in the first step as making this seem rather unneeded, but WikiProject Heavy Metal has a broad focus, whereas we want to have a slimmer focus. If we focus on one as opposed to many, the articles will benefit. Maybe being a sister project of WikiProject Heavy Metal?

Any thoughts, concerns, support, etc. are welcome.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Nonviolence
Comments
  1. Way too narrow. To the extent anything like this needs to be organized at all, it should be a task force of WikiProject Metal. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 16:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Triage

Description
A project to prioritize the various efforts on wikipedia so editors know where the most help is needed.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Remember 21:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I just feel we need a project that could help rank what work is needed the most of wikipedia so editors could respond accordingly. Even if it's not perfect (and of course most people won't agree upon what is important), I think it would be helpful to have a general ranking of efforts.

Tripura

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Tripura.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Maquahuitl
Comments


Description
A project to create a home for trivia and in popular culture information that would be in alignment with wiki policy and have a direct link inside the wiki article.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Ozmaweezer 19:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Lanfear's Bane 14:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Atlant 16:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. S.dedalus 20:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Cpesacreta 21:34, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. DGG (talk) 00:50, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I strongly suggest wikipedia start a new wikiproject for trivia and popular culture references. I know wikiprojects should not go against established policies and guidelines. I know the official policy is to incorporate the trivia sections into the main text of the article, but personally, my favorite wiki/websurfing activity is to read the trivia sections of articles. I find so many fascinating odds and ends and tidbits of information. Plus, the trivia section has so many interesting links to other wiki articles. It always opens up several knew branches of articles I can go out and explore. Occasionally I revisit an article only to find the whole trivia section removed. That always makes me sad. I wonder how many articles I've visited and never got to read the trivia section. I check the history but it rarely says "trivia section removed." It just says "cleanup."

Proposed ideas
  • Allow trivia sections
  • Add another tab at the top of the page for trivia/in pop culture
  • Limit the trivia sections to 40 bullet point items
  • Make the trivia sections have the hide/expandable option

The "deciders" need to find some common ground and compromise and change current policy. I'm confident they could come up with something. I have read a lot of interesting discussions on this topic and there are some really great intelligent ideas out there. Right now we seem to be divided into the "deletionists" and the "inclusionists."

Anyway, just a thought I wanted to pass on to someone or at least release it into the ether of wiki and the internet. Here are some helpful and interesing ideas concerning trivia:

There is Wikipedia:WikiProject Trivia Cleanup where contributors may have different preferences for handling trivia. Wikipedia:WikiProject Trivia was apparently created by one editor without discussion and deleted at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Trivia. Trivia guidelines are discussed at Wikipedia talk:Trivia sections which seems to be a history of the anti-trivia movement. Be sure to check out the 8 archived pages. See also Wikipedia:Handling trivia which is only an essay. See [reference desk] Also see [village pump discussion]

Links I found after creating this proposal:Ozmaweezer 19:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe wikipedia should have a poll for ideas like this that people can vote on and users could view the results. It's hard to believe that the current trivia policy is a "community wide decision." Thanks.Ozmaweezer 18:34, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"I have read a lot of interesting discussions on this topic and there are some really great intelligent ideas out there. Right now we seem to be divided into the "deletionists" and the "inclusionists."" No, we really really are not. In case you hadn't noticed, the discussion is a lot more nuanced than that, and is about practical concerns based on many editors' experience trying to maintain these sections. Skittle 23:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]
The problem, as it were, is that "trivia" that cannot be successfully integrated into the main body of the article is of at best limited value to the article. For the most part, such content can be merged into the body of the article. And while some people do admittedly find such information interesting, it does not further the interests of the encyclopedia to have such information, and certainly not to have a separate section. I have in the past few days been adding "Notable residents" sections to every Montana location article which seems to have such residents. Certainly, such information might qualify as "trivia" by some standards, but it is generally considered important enough to be included in the article. The most serious problem I can see with this proposal would be that it would probably spur multiplcation of such really comparatively useless information. This could potentially completely skew the balance of the article. How much trivia do you think could be added to the George Washington article, for instance? It'd probably double or triple in size, which would be certainly counterproductive and basically make wikipedia less, not more, reliable to its users. John Carter 20:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply to John Carter - I think we all know what the problem is. The admins need to solve these problems and give us a better more inclusive policy for trivia. The current guidelines need to be revised. Ozmaweezer 14:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a problem for the admins. The admins are not necessarily the ones who create and implement policy. Any editor can participate in that process, and there are many admins who have nothing to do with policy and guideline creation and implementation. If you think a particular policy or guideline needs to be revised, go to the talk page for that policy or guideline and make a proposal. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:22, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That is one individual's opinion. It may or may not have sufficient support from others to bring about a change. I don't know. Like I said below, it is almost certainly inappropriate to propose a project whose apparently prime, if not sole, function is to change policies or guidelines. If you want to do that, going to one of the pages indicated by me earlier below would be a much more effective and widely seen way to do so. John Carter 18:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think there is a place for trivia on Wiki and policy would be a good idea. Have the little expandable menus been considered? This would mean trivia would be minimised as standard and only opened by interested parties. Perhaps even integrate trivia references and external links into the section so that it does not cloud or clutter the main article. Lanfear's Bane 14:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The question really isn't regarding "trivia" (although I note neither of you has given the slightest inkling of a definition of this term which you both seem to think is so central to this discussion) but the fact that both of you indicate that the MOS guidelines, in your opinions, need to be revised. The proper place to do that would be to create a draft version of your own guidelines, and then ask for input on that. WikiProjects, however, do not really get created to create draft guidelines for individuals to assert their own opinions. I think the better place for you to do this would be either at the Wikipedia:Village pump, Template:RFCpolicy list, or the talk pages of Wikipedia:Manual of style, not here. And you would also have to establish that the conensus of editors would agree to your proposals, which really cannot be done here. John Carter 16:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
strong disagree I sympathise with the need to keep and collect this kind of information - if it's facatual and people want to know it then Wikipedia should have it. I'm an inclusionist at heart (although I'm not beyond deleting the odd thing). But sadly, I strongly disagree with your proposal in every single detail!
  • Allow trivia sections - Not in their present form, they are far too disruptive to the creation of good quality articles because they accumulate junk. Things that are completely untrue (or which are not adequately referenced even though they might be true) do not belong in Wikipedia.
  • Add another tab at the top of the page for trivia/in pop culture - No. This would be a big MediaWiki software change - and it has severe implications for things like searching. It also sets a precedent that would rapidly result in having to have tabs for things like "Controversies", "Humor" and so forth. Having allowed "Trivia" as a special tab - how would you argue against this rapid tab-proliferation. Hell no!
  • Limit the trivia sections to 40 bullet point items - No. 40 is too many for articles that don't need trivia sections and too few for articles that might warrant them.
  • Make the trivia sections have the hide/expandable option - Again, no. If these sections are appropriate - lets see them. If they aren't, then lets get rid of them.
The problem is this: People see "Trivia" and that the encyclopedia is editable by anyone - and they take this as permission to add any old piece of junk information that a friend of a friend forwarded to them in email last year into the article. I have no problem whatever with including things like errors in movies, celebrity owners of super-cars, easter eggs in video games or sci-fi books written around some bizarre quantum theory thing. The only things I insist on are that: (a) they are well written, (b) they are true and (c) they are referenced. However, they AREN'T - and (crucially) none of your proposals do anything whatever to address that problem. Things that are poorly written, untrue or unreferenced don't belong in the encyclopedia ANYWHERE - not hidden behind some special tab - not tucked away in a [Show] section - not limited to only 40 poorly written, unreferenced lies - they don't belong here AT ALL.
If these things are all well-written/true/referenced - and if they reasonably pertain to the subject of the article - then I have no problem whatever with a small amount of trivia in the article - or when there is too much (but it's all good stuff), I have no problem with having an article called "Trivia relating to XYZ" linked from the XYZ article (we might perhaps want a better name than "Trivia" - but we'll use that for the sake of this argument).
The problem is that when you do that, you accumulate junk faster than you can blink!
If you can somehow solve that problem - then I'm behind allowing trivia sections. But this isn't a matter of how the software works or how the information is presented - it's a matter of members of the public taking us at our word and editing the articles! But somehow, they get the idea that because the title of the section is "Trivia" and there is a long list of weird and wonderful facts, that there is no harm in adding a couple more - even though they are only half-truths much of the time - and (especially) without references.
When I read Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope - I truly would like to write about the compositing error in the climactic battle sequence which results in one of the far distant Tie fighters getting accidentally drawn in front of one of the nearer ones instead of behind it. I have a reference for that - I can write about it in an articulate matter and it belongs in that article because it's true, referenceable, interesting and so forth. But the moment you add that "Trivia" section, every whack-job on the planet will be stuffing the article full of half-truths, fan-cruft, opinions and god knows what else.
If you can find a way to fix that, then IMHO, you can have your trivia sections back. But this proposal doesn't do that.
SteveBaker 19:23, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Popular culture references are not trivia. Documenting the history of how an idea has been perceived is as encyclopedic as documenting what an idea is. --Arcadian 19:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is true. I don't think anyone would have any objections to a project whose goal was to add pop culture references with due weight, although there would certainly be questions as to whether there are any standard sources. Grouping that together with trivia in the title here may be less than productive, though. John Carter 19:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to add my name, but have not the faintest idea how. I am learning as fast as I can, but gosh - wouldn't either a boilerplate "click here" function or a clear guideline (this is how to add your name) be useful? Lot's of us are willing to and interested in working, but the thought of being bold and erasing everyone's name holds me back.Panthera germanicus 19:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)panthera_germanicus[reply]

I don't think this is the appropriate place to discuss this or add your comments. Either add your name or don't. See the links I have provided for discussion and comments about trivia. However I believe the above discussion as well as all the links and archived discussions of this topic prove the need for a revised policy and guidelines. Thanks Ozmaweezer 20:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

my friend, please remember that nobody owns a page in WP space. You may have first planned it, but it is not your prerogative to dictate what we say here or how we say it. Perhaps you have conceived this a little to narrowly in too much detail.DGG (talk) 00:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I added my name. I do hope however that this project could find new solutions to the trivia controversy instead of just rehashing the debate. I in part agree that the concept of “trivia” is odd in an encyclopedia. However, whatever we call it, we should recognize that these sections include useful information that should be included in some form. --S.dedalus 21:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please see Wikipedia talk:Trivia sections#New discussion of trivia guidelines as well. And, in response to Ozmaweezer's explicitly questioning, in bold no less, whether any criticisms of this proposal should be placed here, I would only note that there are in fact several such negative comments on many of the other extant and formal proposals, and it is an accepted practice for such comments to be included. As I have already stated, the best place to discuss changing existing guidelines is probably on the page of the guideline itself. There is now a discussion regarding that matter started there. John Carter 21:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, an encyclopedia, pretty much by definition, is anathema to the idea of trivia - encyclopedias, whatever their size, have some degree of discriminating criteria for their topics, which exist in order to provide a relevant and condensed summarization of the topics at hand. Therefore, anyone seriously interested in integrating vast swathes of trivia together would, IMHO, probably be better advised to consider forking it to a separate and independent wiki which could be administered to suit the needs of such a project, rather than trying to push a square peg into a round hole completely unsuitable for the task. Girolamo Savonarola 21:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also note that User:Ozmaweezer has seemed to violate him/herself the behavior guidelines regarding canvassing and directly encouraged others to do the same. I sincerely wonder whether such potentially unfortunate behavior is really the best way to attempt to bring about changes in guidelines. John Carter 21:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Putting aside the apparent bias of the project's proposer, who is attempting to undermine the legitimacy of the Wikipedia:Trivia sections guideline (which does not recommend removal of trivia sections) as well as stymie discussion regarding the proposal (I note that this is the only legitimate forum for discussing the specific project proposal itself), I think there is value in separating "unprocessed" trivia from integrated trivia, in that it gives contributors the ability to suggest facts for inclusion with very little effort. The questions to ask: is it better to include this material in the article? The reader may be affected positively or negatively from the higher visibility of this information. Is it better to include it on the talk page? It might make sense to separate a list of "facts to consider for inclusion" from general discussion. This suggestion is aligned, if you think about it, with the "stable versions" proposals, in that "unprocessed" trivia would constitute part of the working version of the article, and integrated trivia part of the stable version. I oppose the proposal, on the basis that stable versions are a more general and more appropriate solution to the issue at hand. Dcoetzee 21:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure exactly which proposal you're saying you're opposed to above, and would appreciate a clarification. As opposed to the comment about perhaps creating additions to talk pages for information to be included in the articles, I can see that working. Also, if the stable version proposal is enacted, which still seems a way off so far as I can see, then there wouldn't necessarily be objections to this proposal. John Carter 22:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The proper way to create " home for trivia and in popular culture information that would be in alignment with wiki policy and have a direct link inside the wiki article." is within the wikipedia article itself. WP policy is what we make it; we are not confronting some rigid external policy that we have to adjust ourselves to. WP policy is made by WPedians, and I think that the true consensus on the project once everyone realizeed the implications -- is that the inclusion of relative minor but illuminating material is an appropriate part of an WP article.
We could of course look for alternative is they if the people here in general disagree with that, but I am reluctant to propose an alternative project that would distract us from the goal of writing a fully comprehensive modern encyclopedia.
I am especially reluctant to create any alternative that would even suggest that the influences of important people or artifacts upon later culture is in any way subsidiary to anything, and not the very heart of encyclopedic coverage of human civilization --whether in separate sections or sometimes separate articles, but in any case within the encyclopedia. There are only a few people who think it is necessarily unencyclopedic, and we should not let them drive the rest of us out of the project.
Therefor the proper agenda of the project is primarily to find ways of incorporating the material within WP, and, only as a subsidiary measure, to explore possible alternatives. There might possibly be a place for full coverage of sourceable material within WP and then a supplement of some sort for material without conventional sources. But it would be much better to expand the interpretation of sourceability to cover the contemporary world, not limited to the formal publication biases of the print era. (And I'm a person who has spent my career within formal academe, specializing in the handling of conventional sources--but perhaps that's why I realize that it isn't the only part of the world that matters.)
And when it comes to considering alternatives, there are quite a number. The one I like best is a dual level encyclopedia, where those who want to limit their access can do so--an idea I first saw proposed with respect to fair use images--the full use of everything permissible in US law, with an automatic rendering for those in areas where more restrictive practices apply.
All WP projects are open, even to those who somewhat disagree with the goals but are not obstructive. But this project must not be limited to the pursuit of one particular view--not even mine. Such projects mostly fail. I am not concerned with the preferred solution of the editor who initiated the project. it is not canvassing to promote the cooperation in a fair way of supporters of a particular direction-- wikiprojects are one of the established fair open and above-board ways of doing this. But if User:Ozmaweezer had a single preferred goal in mind, he can not own the project, and I am sure fully realizes it. The project is the common territory of whoever wants to work on it. DGG (talk) 00:50, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Project created

Well, I've been very bold and created the project: Wikipedia:WikiProject Trivia and Popular Culture. I've diverged from most of the specifics Ozmaweezer laid out, but I hope the overall intent is still intact. The project page can always be changed anyway.--Father Goose 23:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to point out that, no, the overall intent is not intact at all. The point here was to preserve trivia sections as separate sections. Your project and this proposal are at odds with each other.
Equazcion • argue/improves • 01:57, 10/18/2007
The project overview I drafted is agnostic about actual trivia sections, but still meant to eke out a place for trivia and pop culture information overall. It'll have to be up to Ozmaweezer to say if what I wrote really misses the point, and (s)he can always change the project wording.--Father Goose 08:23, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I am glad Father Goose was bold. Ozmaweezer, I was genuinely asking for help - I am not familiar with many aspects of editing which are readily apparent to you. I thought, out of good faith, one might tell me how to add my name or point me towards the instructions. Unfortunately, you instead told me to either add my name or not, not to discuss. That was not discussion, it was a genuine request...I would still appreciate it if someone could help me there. Thanks!84.151.231.26 02:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)panthera_germanicus[reply]

I believe Ozmaweezer was not replying to your question but addressing everyone who had commented on the project instead of just signing on to it. As regards your question, since the project's started now, you can sign on to it by clicking here and adding an asterisk and your name.--Father Goose 08:23, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 Definitely 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]

Unionism

Description
A project to develop the coverage of Unionism, particularly with reference to Unionist members of the Northern Ireland House of Commons, particularly Ministers and Prime Ministers. Biographies of actors are mostly missing pre 1985, and work needs to be done on the institutions and events that formed and sustained the movement.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Comments

Why cut the scope down to biographies of UUP MPs 1922-72? Unionism in Ireland is much broader than that. --sony-youthpléigh 12:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, that is more a short term aim rather than the scope of the project.Traditional unionist 12:12, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given the current dispute over Northern Irish politics, I wonder whether this is the best proposal, or whether a WikiProject on Northern Irish politics would be more productive? I'm aware that Unionism is broader than that, but Unionism in Northern Irish politics would presumably be a major focus of this project. Such a project might, potentially, help further discussion and a NPOV in this often controversial field. Please note that I'm not arguing against this proposal, just investigating an idea. Warofdreams talk 17:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree entirely. I think it would be very beneficial, remember the members don't need to be unionists! What's unhealthy is to raise these sort of issues before you've seen it in operation. Does the Irish Republicanism project cause trouble? Apparently not, so I hardly think this one would. --Counter-revolutionary 17:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm specifically not saying that this project wouldn't be beneficial. I suspect that it probably would be. All I'm doing is offering a suggestion for an alternative or additional possibility. I think that this is the ideal time to raise the idea. If it gains no support, then fine, I'll happily support this proposal. Warofdreams talk 17:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think a project on NI politics in general really would be too broad. --Counter-revolutionary 17:32, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would support both proposals. They're not mutually exclusive and there's no reasons why we couldn't have both projects going simultaneously. Valenciano 21:32, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would be interested in this especially the 1922-1973 period, as I have added alot of info to existing bio's on members of the former NIHOC.--Padraig 21:57, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, an umbrella for the "two" camps, would be useful, I believe - exchange of information, people, energy, related drives, etc. - not to mention keeping the peace by ensuring that two opposing camps don't emerge. --sony-youthpléigh 10:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great, it seems there is some interest in both proposals. I'll put my name to this one, and unless someone else does it first, I'll put in a proposal for a Northern Irish politics WikiProject. Warofdreams talk 13:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Warofdreams, I would support a Northern Ireland politics Wikiproject, but not a Northern Irish one, that is devisive, I would also support an Unionist or Irish Unionist wikiproject which I think would be beneficial to Wikipedia.--Padraig 20:17, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You object to the word Irish? That is objecting to proper grammar!Traditional unionist 20:22, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No I object to a Unionist campaign to protray the people of Northern Ireland as northern Irish as if they are a seperate nationality from the Irish population.--Padraig 21:50, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well alas that's not for you to say - indeed there is a lot of evidence to say that the Northern Irish identity is increasing above British and Irish amongst both communities. Regardless, this has enough support now doesn't it?Traditional unionist 12:36, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But Wikipedia is not a soapbox to promote a political campaign, and the name of the project should reflect that.--Padraig 21:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Quite so. Which is why it makes more sense to use the grammatically correct Northern Irish.Traditional unionist 22:00, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The proposed Wikiproject would be for Northern Ireland Politics, why would you support a name that is devisive unless you intend to exclude editors that don't share a Unionist POV on Northern Ireland, wikiprojects are intended to help editors work together to further Wikipedia not cause division.--Padraig 22:07, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The divisiveness of such a name is tenuous in the extreme. And thus far, you are the only pedant to have aired a negative view.Traditional unionist 22:09, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One doesn't have to support unionism to help out with this project of course! --Counter-revolutionary 23:07, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have created a proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Politics of Northern Ireland. Please have a look and comment; if you are interested in participating, please add your name! Warofdreams talk 19:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]



Uttarakhand

Description
A project, probably working with Wikipedia:WikiProject India, to work on articles relating to the Indian state of Uttarakhand.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

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]
This group is now active at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals/Weasels work group.
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 task force 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]
Mustelidae is a family rather than a superfamily and it has an article. Given how specific this grouping is, it might work better as a subproject of a larger animal grouping. JeffStickney 03:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Far too narrowly-named given its almost immediate scope expansion. Rename to WikiProject Mustelids. Also, I oppose the proposal to split WP:MAMMAL by what they eat (which is often disputed, anyway; many zoologists classify canines as "carnivores" because their preferred sustenance is meat, while others classify them as "opportunistic omnivores" because of what their actual diet mostly consists of, and so forth). Such a split would simply lead to additional and pointless neverending disputes. If it is split up, it should be by family or other broad classification (e.g. mustelids, canines, felines/cats, ursines/bears, etc.) Also, no opposition to taskforcing this; I'm just saying if it has the buy-in to become a full project, it must be renamed, because the proposed name is directly misleading about the project's scope. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 16:23, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I love the idea of it but do you have the entire listing of the animals you're going to use? I haven't done much research but these are the animals I found in that family - Minks, Otters, Badgers, Wolverines, Martens, Tayras, Fishers, Skunks, Ferrets, Weasels, and various polecats.I'm sorry if I got that wrong or if thats not all of them.Like I said I haven't done much research.I hope you get this thing up and running.Nadaina 02:35, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Winnipeg Blue Bombers

Description
The Blue Bombers are one of the most storied franchises in the CFL, and theres enough fans out there with knowledge to share to have a wikiproject made.
The Person who proposed it
User:burnqq
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. [your name here]
Comments

Actually, considering there isn't yet a specific WikiProject for the CFL per se, maybe it would be a better idea to establish that first, and maybe set this individual team project up as a subproject later? John Carter 23:05, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Cart, then horse. Chicken, then egg. Wheel, then Duesenberg. CFL first. Chris 01:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You may get some support for a parent CFL project, ideas, perhaps something to boldfaced copy, from Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League. Chris 01:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
CFL wikiproject is something i may start later Burnqq 03:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wizard Rock

Description
This project will improve all the pages concerning the musical genre of wizard rock. I believe that this WP is too broad to be created as a taskforce. It is also to be noted that there is, so far, only one wizard rock band on Wikipedia - Harry and the Potters
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Ka5hmir
Comments

But the whole point would be to expand the articles, and make new ones. Ka5hmirTalk To Me! 05:59, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


World Heritage Sites

Description
With over 800 sites currently designated a World Heritage Site by the UN, I think that it is time to create a Wikiproject on World Heritage Sites to better organize and improve articles that are related or on a World Heritage Site. -- Hdt83 Chat 05:34, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. -- Hdt83 Chat
  2. Ans-mo 13:56, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 20:34, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments



Zoo Tycoon

Description
Judging by the popularity and amount of content on the Zoo Tycoon series I believe that a Zoo Tycoon Wikiproject should be brought up. We would prevent vandilism on the pages (which is surprisingly frequent) and of course improve and expand the arrticles currently.

For example, the page Zoo Tycoon 2: Extinct Animals is being vanalised almost once a week and, due to it being an upcoming game, various fand will edit in wishlists and predictions. The main Zoo Tycoon fansite and forum is currently down, both increasing the likelihood of wishlists and increasing checks on the article for latest news.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. --Cuddly Panda 10:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[Cuddly Panda][reply]
Comments

Consider setting this up as a task force in the gaming areas, as this is a rather narrow area for a project. Feyandstrange 11:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Feyandstrange. Eddie 03:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not have a WikiProject for the whole Tycoon series? Simply south 21:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This should definitely be a taskforce rather than a project. Codelyoko193 Talk 22:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject 1990s

Description
The purpose of this project is to add or update articles that related to the decade. Such as music groups, television shows, movies, news/world events, etc.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. leemcd56
  2. User:Hailey C. Shannon
  3. I love the 90's. Abeg92contribs 02:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • I'm not really good at wording, so I'm gonna really need some help writing the project page. I'm sorry that I also have the project page already started. I guess I should have waited =(. Leemcd56 05:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.

American girl (company)

Description:this Wiki project is one that improves and is about American girl and every thing about it!Saturn star 19:57, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name!)
Comments
  • Only one. Please define what you mean by American Girl. If you are referring to the toy company, I note that there right now isn't an "action figure"/Barbie/whatever project extant, and that the likelihood of this groups success would probably go up significantly if it were to broaden to include those subjects as well. And you might want to sign your own name, as well. John Carter 00:51, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
you know what? i like that idea!Saturn star 19:57, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball players

Description
This proposed group would work with the existing Biography and Baseball projects specifically on biographies of baseball players, coaches, owners, announcers, etc., and other related articles.
Interested wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 13:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Basketball players

Description
This proposed group would work with the existing Biography and Basketball projects specifically on biographies of basketball players, coaches, team owners, announcers, officials, etc. and other related articles.
Interested wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 13:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Beyond Good & Evil task force (WikiProject Video games)

Description
This task force will create and expand articles around the fantastic universe of the video game Beyond Good & Evil.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. MrStalker
Comments

British Comics

Description
This task force/work group would deal specifically with the characters, publications, storylines, locales, and, to a lesser extent, creators of comics published in Great Britain, as well as these characters, etc., appearances in other media.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Emperor 23:24, 30 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]
  2. John Carter 00:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

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

DC Comics

Description
This task force/work group would deal specifically with the characters, publications, storylines, locales, and, to a lesser extent, creators of comics published by DC Comics, as well as these characters, etc., appearances in other media.
Temporary project page
User:Warlordjohncarter/DC Comics.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 00:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Phoenix741 00:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Emperor 01:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Chris Griswold (☎☓) 02:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Basique 17:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. jc37 20:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Hiroshi-br 01:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I do not know much about DC comics, but I will help when I can.Phoenix741 00:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been mainly working on Vertigo and Wildstorm areas but crossover into the main DC areas (although quite a lot of the major titles are well covered). (Emperor 01:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Football (soccer) players

Description
This proposed group would work with the existing Biography and Football (soccer) projects specifically on biographies of football players, coaches, and related individuals and other related articles.
Interested wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 13:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Franco-Belgian comics

Description
This task force/work group would deal specifically with the characters, publications, storylines, locales, and, to a lesser extent, creators of Franco-Belgian comics, as well as these characters, etc., appearances in other media.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 00:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Murghdisc. 06:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Emperor 14:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. $yD!
  5. [your name here]
Comments

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]

Goosebumps

Description
This task force would work on improving pages related to Goosebumps, such as the television series, R.L. Stine, the various book articles and lists.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. 60 Delta 22:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Marvel Comics

Description
This task force/work group would deal specifically with the characters, publications, storylines, locales, and, to a lesser extent, creators of comics published by Marvel Comics, as well as these characters, etc., appearances in other media.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Phoenix741 23:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. John Carter 00:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. The Placebo Effect 03:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Chris Griswold (☎☓) 02:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Emperor 14:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  6. jc37 20:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  7. [your name here]
Comments

This will proboubly be a taskforce of Wikiproject Comics The Placebo Effect 03:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

North American football players

Description
This proposed group would work with the existing Biography and footballl projects specifically on biographies of football players, coaches, etc., and other related articles. This group would specifically deal with college (and, potentially, pre-college), NFL, CFL, Arena Football League, and similar articles.
Interested wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 13:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

People and places

Description
This proposed group would work with the existing Biography project to help ensure that individuals are mentioned as "Notable residents, alumni, employees" or whatever on such other pages as might be relevant to themselves.
Interested wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. John Carter 13:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

This may seem like a strange idea to many. However, I do think that the people most likely to work on the articles about individuals include both the people involved in that particular field of endeavor (sports, entertainment, government, what have you) and those people who work with articles about the locations where a given person lived. Many articles already have "Notable residents", etc., sections, and it is relatively easy to ensure that individuals get included on those lists. Doing so will generally also improve the article on the location, etc., itself. John Carter 13:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revert Checkers

Hello, there if the task is already covered by another task force then forgive me. As I was reverting vandalism today, I noticed that I made a mistake and reverted a good faith edit. Another editor, speedily undid my revert and restored the version. I then realized how easy it was to make a mistake while fixing vandalism, especially on a busy vandal fighting day. I have noticed that others also sometimes make mistakes of the same nature, and thought wouldn't it be a good idea to have a task force of WP:CVU, devoted to fixing reverting mistakes? Just a thought. --Tλε Rαnδоm Eδιτоr 16:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 12:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Comments
  • Great Idea but most of the time when I made that mistake there is someone there, it only happen 3 times to me,but still I'll give it a go.Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 12:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice proposal, but I don't think it's really necessary. With so many users monitoring recent changes, I think that users should just be on a lookout for incorrect reversions. And anyway, how would this project run? Where would the revert-checker start? Unless there were as many people on the project as there were watching recent changes, I don't think the project would work very well. Just my two cents... *Cremepuff222* "As cool as grapes..." 17:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think an entire association is needed because, like Cremepuff222 said, a lot of users monitor recent changes and can even configure certain tools such as VandalFighter to filter edits with summaries that contain words or phrases such as "Reverted 2 edits...", "rv", "revert", or "vandalism". For these reasons, regular RC patrollers - such as those commenting - can take on the job. Thanks, « ANIMUM » 20:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
this is a frequent occurrence -- but this sort of error is easy enough to fix when discovered. With practice one learns to check. DGG 03:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sonic the Hedgehog

Description
This taskforce would improve any article relating to Sonic the Hedgehog series, like the game articles and character articles (Tails, etc.), and any other articles relating to the series. Codelyoko193 TalkEditor Review
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Codelyoko193 TalkEditor Review 21:59, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

TV Characters

Description
The project would help improve articles on fictional characters from television shows.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Codelyoko193 Talk
  2. jc37 20:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary Project Page

User:Codelyoko193/tvcharacters

Comments
You just need to move it, don't wry I will take care of that.Phoenix741(Talk Page) 20:46, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
O and GL.Phoenix741(Talk Page) 22:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Operation: New Leaf

Description
This would be a taskforce of the Counter-Vandalism Unit that would go to vandals and, through explaining Wikipedia's greatness and how much more fun it is to contribute, have them become new and trusted members of the community. In essence, it would have persistent vandals begin to constructively edit, and turn over a new leaf. With enough encouragement by patient and friendly individuals, I'm sure that a difference can be made. Arky¡Hablar! 19:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Phoenix741(Talk Page) 14:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • I have created a userbox for the taskforce as well:
→
This user is a member of Operation: New Leaf
→
File:Torchlight button ok.png

Arky¡Hablar! 23:32, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is a very noble Idea, but I dont see it working. sry Phoenix741 23:40, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, Phoenix. I can see where you are coming from, and this is a thing I hear very often. However, it must be understood that vandals of Wikipedia aren't really on a vendetta to destroy the 'pedia, or that they hate Wikipedia, and are trying to bring it down. In most or all cases, they are bored, and need something to do with their time, or perhaps they crave attention on an international scale. When they are warned to stop, this just encourages them to keep going, so they can get warned again, or blocked, and receive even more attention. Either way, kind and very patient editors can go up to them and say that if they have time to kill, they can gain a lot more from contributing to the encyclopedia than vandalizing it. They need to be told that, if they contribute constructively, they will be loved and embraced by the community. After all, with vandals, it's not about assuming good faith, but about not assuming bad faith. They don't hate the wiki--they just need something to do. That's where this task force comes in. Happy editing, Arky¡Hablar! 01:14, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I get what your saying, I really do, and I respect the idea, just I am not sure if they will get the message, and then they may go to vandalizing your user page. I would joint, just I have no patients for them 8-/. I hope this works, I really hope it does and I wish you the best of luck, but I can see this ending badly.Phoenix741 01:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then I thank you at least for your moral support; it is much appreciated. There is always the fear of a terrible end to all this, but if it means that maybe even only one vandal gets the message, I'll be satisfied. Then, at least, it's one less user to have no patience with =P Thanks again for your comments, they are much appreciated, Arky¡Hablar! 01:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like a good idea, perhaps you should leave a message at CVU page and the WP:VANDALISM page to gain a broader view of what the community thinks. --Hdt83 Chat 08:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arky I really don't see this working out. I mean, let's face it: some people enjoy destroying the work of others simply because it can be fun to garner a negative reaction out of them. And who can say they haven't laughed at someone when that someone was mad? Good luck, but don't get your hopes up. --MKnight9989 13:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, MKnight, I wholeheartedly agree. The main reason vandals vandalize is because they crave attention for their "handiwork". However, this does not in any way mean they are deliberately destroying the work of others merely for the sake of destruction. If, through patience and kindness, they can understand that they'll receive even more attention by constructively contributing, there is no doubt in my mind they can be reformed. Just take a look here and see the progress that's been made already. Imagine how big this list could be with this taskforce in operation. That's the kind of thing worth working for. Arky¡Hablar! 22:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Most vandals are just school age people of little intelligence. There might be the odd one that could contribute something useful, but I think for most of them editing Wikipedia seriously would increase rather than reduce their boredom. I don't think we should be wasting time with them, I don't see that it's worth the effort. If I see something I can reasonably call blatant vandalism, I give them the bv template then have them blocked if they continue. If I see people giving vandals soft warnings for deliberate or continued vandalism I often override them myself with a higher level warning. It's nice that you want to help them but I just don't think it's worth it, both because there is little to be gained and much to be lost, both in terms of our time and the delay in blocking that will allow more vandalism to occur. Richard001 08:40, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, Arky, not every vandal is an attention-whore. Some people enjoy destroying things. Some people are naturally malicious. others just enjoy badgering others. In school these people are called bullies. --MKnight9989 12:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, MKnight, not every vandal seeks attention; some simply enjoy destruction. However, these extreme cases are in no way equal in number to those in which the vandal merely seeks attention. Secondly, to address Richard's concerns, in my opinion, it is never a waste of time to help someone, even if you don't think you'll succeed. Also, there is much to be gained from another constructive contributor, and little to be lost if they refuse. After all, as you said, you can upgrade their warnings, have them blocked, or any other sort of punishment if they continue their vandalism. If the correct effort is put in, there is much to be gained from a reformed vandal, but, yes, I understand your argument. Arky¡Hablar! 01:18, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Russian rock

I would like to create a Russian rock WikiProject. I'm shure it's needed, because we have some of the greatest bands in Russian rock not having articles, or having lame articles, and with the use of WikiProject we could make a list of articles needing references, or expansion, or the list of articles needed to be created, and in that way those who want to help here will see exacly what to do. Could someone here please explain me how do i do it by steps? How do i create the project? How do i create the template? Hope somebody will help me here. M.V.E.i. 11:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

United States Comics

Description
This task force/work group would deal specifically with the characters, publications, storylines, locales, and, to a lesser extent, creators of comics published in the United States, emphasizing those which might not be covered by any other extant work groups, as well as these characters, etc., appearances in other media.
Temporary project page
User:Warlordjohncarter/United States comics
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Phoenix741 23:23, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. John Carter 00:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  3. (Emperor 01:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]
  4. [your name here]
Comments

It is understood that this group would deal only with publishers not already covered by other work groups. So, if the DC and Marvel comics workgroups proposed above become a reality, this group would deal with the other American comics publishers. John Carter 00:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have done quite a bit of work on entries relating to Dark Horse Comics, Image Comics, IDW Publishing and other smaller publishers (including working on getting them properly categorised, etc.) and feel this workgroup would help give the other publishers the attention they need to further improve their entries, after all being #3 and #4 in the US still means you are on eo fthe biggest comics publishers in the world and entries need to be expanded and sourced appropriately. (Emperor 01:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Philippine collegiate leagues

Description
This task force would standardize the articles and other templates pertaining to the University Athletic Association of the Philippines (UAAP), Philippine NCAA, and other Philippine collegiate leagues.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Aeron Valderrama 04:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  2. [your name here]
Comments

Venus

Description
A task force of WikiProject Astronomical objects, this task force would focus on improving articles related to the planet Venus, its exploration, the astronomers who studied it, and its geology.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. Shrewpelt
Comments
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals&oldid=165401245"