Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Media

New project on Media Calicocat 14:54, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Multimedia technology

Hey Calicocat. I'm looking for a place to coordinate VST, Free audio software, Digital audio workstation, and other articles related to Multimedia technology, especially of the audio/video type. Could this project's scope expand to include that? (BTW,There was a comment tag on the project page that had commented out a big chunk of the page. I fixed it.) Quinobi 08:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great, we need about 10 to 15 people to make this project really go, I think. at least 10. That's what's advised for projects. Some of these items fit on the articles list, so can certainly add those. Also any other thoughts are welcome. I see us looking at Media from the technical and the application side, creative solutions, compeating formats, economics, journalism, entertainment, law, ethics. Are you good at formating templates? A project needs a template to help promote it, those are placed on the talk pages of articles of relevance to the project. So we need to advertise the project some more as a good start. Hope we can make this go a bit. I'm also working on a related project on journalism. Calicocat 09:16, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to associate an article with this WikiProject just type in {{WikiProjectNotice|Media}} on its discussion page. I went ahead and stuck one on Multimedia which was nominated for an article improvement drive but never got improved. My interests are in things like audio production and the music business, but this seems like a good project to work through. BTW, haven't I seen you in #wikipedia? Maybe we can talk there and get some activity on this project rolling. Quinobi WP:CBTF 16:59, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Title and scope

Hi, Calicocat. The project title seems much wider than the stuff I saw listed so far. I'd like to suggest a middle ground, with a title of "Mass media", which would also include, for example, TV and records. Maurreen (talk) 15:02, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Media at this time, redirects to Mass media, which has a link to Media (disambiguation), which I just tried to expand a bit. We might could work from there to disambiguate the purpose and scope of this project. |wink| -----CQ----- key-up----- 05:38, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I put the media "disambig" page at the top the list of project related articles. I also thing the "disam" idea is good. Also, please put yourself down as a project participant. Thanks Calicocat 06:23, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I expaneded the text for the Scope of the project and also worked on templates which were modeled after the one seen at Journalism, a new color should be selected so as to aviod confusion. I added some projects I felt were similar and some that I thought were descendants; I added articles to the list and created a way for someone to sign-up easily. Calicocat 06:23, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So would it be OK to change the name to "Mass media"? If not, how about "Media (communication)"? Maurreen (talk) 07:53, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Im glad you'll be looking in from time to time. I'd rather keep the name just as "Media;" Mass Media is included within that and then Journalism a subset of that. I wonder if there's a way to do simple graphics or flow charts to show this better... Calicocat 10:17, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion for media articles

Hi there. I think it would be a good idea to start a series of articles on media bias in different countries/regions, or just media overviews in general. For example, the article Media bias in the United States would be well complimented by articles on the UK, Australia, Canada (although very close to US), Israel - in fact any country. I'd love to read about media bias in Russia, for example.

I know very little about most of these countries, but I'm willing to start the one on the UK as soon as I'm done writing my current research project (see User:Will Lakeman/Wikipedia research for details). I think it might make a nice series.illWill 22:47, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a good idea, but in terms of this project, I thought reviewing the articles was an interesting experience; I think we're just getting the lay of the land. Doing these projects is like a "pull back to reveal" camera move, or even the aerial photography of Wikipedia. Sometimes I like doing articles, other times I like doing project work. I realize projects might not always move so quickly, nor should they. Careful consideration has to be given so as not to introduce systemic biases and to make sure that good articles are not bashed about becuase they do not meet some outside "standard" imposed by the project. Let's see how things go and try to get a few more folks looking at the porject. -30- Calicocat 06:37, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hierarchy definition

Woah. Back up a bit Calicocat. I think it's better to fill out the project page rather than fill it up. I learnt this the hard way with Wikipedia:WikiProject_Community. It also has a dual scope, by the way.

I added everything carefully, giving careful thought to each item added. Some things might be reduced, but it wasn't just filling it up. That should be clear if you look at the selections made and so on. I'm not being adversarial with you. I'll certainly not rushing this along. Thanks for the comment and please sign up to help out with the project. Calicocat 09:09, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I like the Hierarchy statement. I think we should have something like that related to scientific hierarchy of media. I think that's natural and I included that project that way, but it would be well stated in the Hierarchy. Calicocat 10:07, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry Cat. That was me. I Forgot to sign my post! By "learnt the hard way", I mean getting hollered at for eating up too much WikiProjectSpace with too few returns on the investment. The new template kind of inspired me to go hog wild, and I ended up eating some crow. That's probably a tasty meal for a CalicoCat but hardly befitting for a Jedi. Quinobi 20:14, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Existent Wikiportals

Possible relevance:

Looking around on these and other projects might help to get some better purposity and scopage. Quinobi 20:14, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cool I was taking a look at those. Thanks for posting them. Calicocat 03:52, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Advisors

Some folks might not have time for a lot of work on this but would be willing to give advice from time to time, or perhaps make a key contribution. Hence, I created a section for "Advisors" I think it's a good idea and, Maurreen, I took the liberty of moving your name into that section as well since you said you don't think you'll have much time on this. (I'm having fun with this. It's interesting to see the universe of articles out there.) Calicocat 03:50, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks, I think "advisor" sounds better than "associate member". :) Maurreen (talk) 00:46, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]