Talk:Skype a Scientist

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Science Low‑importance

	Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

In 2021 the web page said

We'll be releasing future dates soon :) Victuallers (talk) 10:33, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This page reads like a news article

The sections "Origins" and "Success" read like an article from npr or forbes. Rather than take from the source material directly, these sections should read more like an encyclopedia article. A page about Skype a Scientist should be about what the program is and not the founder. [Wikipedia is not a newspaper.] Prezi2 (talk) 22:15, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree on both points. I can work through the article slowly to help. Rhinopias (talk) 00:18, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've started haphazardly reorganizing and trimming but I need to leave. Tone is definitely off but I think mentioning McAnulty's name often is a necessity seeing how the organization started. Just because it mentions her a lot doesn't mean it's content about her and not the organization. But obviously writing "Sarah" is wrong, and the organization's name can be used more in place. Rhinopias (talk) 00:49, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this. I couldn't describe what the issue was but this definitely gets at it. I'll edit it when I have time as well. Prezi2 (talk) 00:57, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to see it improved and expanded. There's no reason there can't be a founder mugshot though. Prezi2, did you create the Skype a Scientist logo? Are you connected with the organization? --Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 02:05, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I just got the picture off their website/twitter bio. Prezi2 (talk) 02:53, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Well, you've uploaded it to Commons claiming it's your own work; i.e. that you're the copyright holder. I'm not sure, from corresponding with her, that Sarah was happy releasing the logo under an open licence. But in any case only the copyright holder can do that. --Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 04:10, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that makes complete sense. I'll take it down. Prezi2 (talk) 04:32, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and facts

I organized the body and checked all the sourcing. Besides the photo copyright issue (which maybe you're working on, Giantflightlessbirds?), the infobox parameters seem outdated – if one of you has time can you copy the template from Template:Infobox organization and transfer information over? And I can try to find more recent numbers (in terms of the classrooms/scientists/countries figures) published somewhere from later in 2019 or early 2020, but the early 2019 ones are from the transcript of an interview with the founder, so we could probably use a better secondary source.

"Video conferencing programs" is a very long, dull section title but I'm not sure what would encompass the scope of it. "Video conferencing" or "Video programs"? But then the "After Hours" program is also a video thing and I have that in "Other" because it's so separated from the classroom part? Also I think "Founding" is a bit more appropriate than "History" because what we're talking about there is barely 3 years old. There are examples of "founding" used in highly rated articles, like this one.

I can do some more random cleanup sometime this week and hopefully we can find a solid source for facts, or something else fun to submit to WP:DYK? But it's definitely getting there! Rhinopias (talk) 06:57, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]