Wikipedia:WikiProject Paranormal

WP:PARA

This WikiProject is believed to be inactive.

Consider looking for related projects for help or ask at the Teahouse.
If you are not currently a project participant and wish to help you may still participate in the project. This status should be changed if collaborative activity resumes.

(Tag placed 23 January 2022)

WikiProject
Paranormal

General information
Main project page	talk
Participants	talk
Project banner	talk
Project category	talk
Departments
Assessment	talk
Collaboration	talk
Newsletter	talk
Peer review	talk

Welcome to WikiProject Paranormal, a WikiProject that aims to provide a framework for the improvement and organization of articles related to the paranormal, anomalous phenomena and other similar areas. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask us on our discussion page.

Anyone is welcome to join by listing their username on the /Participants page and contributing to the project. Make sure to put our discussion page to your watchlist so you're notified of new discussions. Watchlisting Wikipedia:WikiProject Paranormal/Article alerts and Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Paranormal is also strongly recommended.

Goals[edit]

To provide a concise and accurate record of notable beliefs, organizations, experiments, individuals and events which are associated with the paranormal, including their history, background and their current status.
To provide a framework (including infoboxes, categories, and examples of Best Practice) from within which scholarly entries about the paranormal, and related topics, may be produced.
To provide a scholarly set of terminology to describe the paranormal which is technically, culturally, and contextually accurate.
To seek out and apply verifiable mainstream sources to pages within the projects scope with the aim of A) addressing any issues of verifiability and reliability that have been highlighted in existing entries, and B) ensuring that new entries are of sufficient quality that their verifiability and reliability do not become an issue.
To ensure that each entry approaches its topic from a balanced and neutral perspective.
To ensure that the notability of each topic can be gleaned from its entry, without the need for additional explanation.
To ensure that a clear dividing line is established between reporting the belief in/background of the topic in a scholarly manner, and advocating/denouncing the topic itself.
To expand project stubs to full entries and to progress full entries to the next level.
Patrol frequently vandalized pages within the project's scope.

Scope[edit]

Paranormal articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
Quality	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA			3	5		2	10
FL				1			1
GA		1	4	12		6	23
B	5	14	21	50	4	61	155
C	6	10	45	132	3	107	303
Start	1	6	54	270	38	480	849
Stub			5	75	32	188	300
List	1	4	5	23		18	51
Category			1	1	566		568
Disambig					7		7
File					15		15
Project					11		11
Template					14		14
NA		1		1	76		78
Other					7		7
Assessed	13	36	138	570	773	862	2,392
Unassessed				2		76	78
Total	13	36	138	572	773	938	2,470
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 7,778			Ω = 4.74

(Assessment log)

Subjects covered by this project include (but are not necessarily limited to):

Anomalistics
Cryptozoology
Paranormal phenomena
Paranormal hoaxes and frauds
Parapsychology
Fringe science, protoscience, and pseudoscience
Ufology
Urban myths and legends
unexplained disappearances
Some conspiracy theories
megaliths and similar

The beginnings of a list of topics which are covered in reference books directly related to this topic can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Paranormal/Encyclopedic articles.

Categories[edit]

High-level article categories

Stub categories

Recognized content[edit]

The following articles fall within the scope of the project and have been noted for their outstanding quality. Project members are encouraged use them as examples of good practice and to note their different writing and organizational styles.

Full list: Wikipedia:WikiProject Paranormal/Recognized content

This is a list of recognized content, updated weekly by JL-Bot (talk · contribs). There is no need to edit the list yourself. If an article is missing from the list, make sure it is tagged (e.g. {{WikiProject Paranormal}}) or categorized correctly. See WP:RECOG for configuration options.

Featured articles[edit]

Featured lists[edit]

List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events

Good articles[edit]

Featured pictures[edit]

Líneas de Nazca, Nazca, Perú, 2015-07-29, DD 49

Good article nominees[edit]

Roswell incident

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team release version selections[edit]

Reincarnation

To-do[edit]

Figure out what to do with old to-do lists...

Article alerts[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Paranormal/Article alerts:

Did you know

21 Jan 2023 – Jailangkung (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Arsonal (t · c); see discussion
18 Jan 2023 – Empath (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Psiĥedelisto (t · c); see discussion

Articles for deletion

28 Jan 2023 – Jenia Meng (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Liz (t · c); see discussion (16 participants)
14 Jan 2023 – UFO-Memorial Ängelholm (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by LuckyLouie (t · c); see discussion (11 participants; relisted)

Redirects for discussion

31 Jan 2023 – The Sasquatch (talk · edit · hist) →Bigfoot was RfDed by TNstingray (t · c); see discussion
31 Jan 2023 – Bigsquatch (talk · edit · hist) →Bigfoot was RfDed by TNstingray (t · c); see discussion

Good article nominees

21 Sep 2022 – Roswell incident (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Feoffer (t · c); start discussion

Requested moves

29 Jan 2023 – Reportedly haunted locations in the District of Columbia (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to Reportedly haunted locations in Washington, D.C. by Thrakkx (t · c); see discussion

Articles to be merged

20 Jun 2022 – Fringe science (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Fringe theory by Piotrus (t · c); see discussion

Deletion sorting[edit]

Paranormal articles for deletion:

Click "[show]" to expand

Shortcut

WP:AFD/WOO

Paranormal deletion[edit]

Jenia Meng[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL)

I am not sure how to categorize this individual's profession but given the weight of this article upon her education, I'm going to say that she doesn't meet WP:PROF. In my online search get mentions of her in "the media", her website and social media accounts but being in the press doesn't equate to notability on Wikipedia. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:52, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Comics and animation, and Science. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:52, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NOTE: The following comment was posted by an editor who has edited this page both using the account Effortshitconsistentinvest and using IP editing, with the IP address 211.30.131.151. JBW (talk) 20:23, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

keep. Google the name, it is already given a knowledge panel. From Google: "Knowledge panels are automatically generated, and information that appears in a knowledge panel comes from various sources across the web. In some cases, we may work with data partners who provide authoritative data on specific topics like movies or music, and combine that data with information from other open web sources." https://support.google.com/knowledgepanel/answer/9163198?hl=en . The page has been vandalized because of multidisciplinary nature of the research Effortshitconsistentinvest (talk) 06:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Google Knowledge Panel is not what we would consider a reliable source that establishes notability, especially for someone claiming credentials in the academic world. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:04, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete. Heavily promotional, could be G11 speedy. Article creator seems non-knowledgeable re Wikipedia standards for notability: having a Google knowledge panel means absoutely nothing for us, and none of the sources in the article meet the standards of depth of coverage, reliability, and independence from the subject required for WP:GNG notability. WP:PROF seems far out of reach for someone who claims a doctorate but is not using it in an academic capacity, for whom Google Scholar only lists one publication, and whose article instead appears based on WP:FRINGE claims. The fringe claims, in turn, create a stronger requirement that we use in-depth coverage of those claims from a mainstream point of view, to meet WP:NPOV, we do not have that coverage, and searching did not turn up anything better. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:20, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NOTE: The following comment was posted by an editor who has edited this page both using the account Effortshitconsistentinvest and using IP editing, with the IP address 211.30.131.151. JBW (talk) 20:23, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

page has been vandalized by Eppstein https://www.quora.com/Is-David-Eppstein-useful-for-Wikipedia it says censorship of theology, the article is not Eppstein's field Effortshitconsistentinvest (talk) 07:36, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Paranormal. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:10, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete Can't see how would meet WP:NPROF at all. As mentioned, Google's Knowledge Panels effectively mean nothing for Wikipedia. The only potential way I can think of to keep is if someone finds sufficient independant reviews to meet WP:NAUTHOR or WP:GNG, which I failed to. -Kj cheetham (talk) 13:00, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete The text is awkward, but more importantly, it is also promotional. The sources are unreliable and further searching turned up none better. The idea that a Google knowledge panel should imply notability is trivially refuted by the very description of Google knowledge panels quoted above. XOR'easter (talk) 13:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete As others have said, seems promotional, very thin mentions on the web, does not seem to meet PROF criteria 1 through 8 despite having doctorate. —DIYeditor (talk) 22:22, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Australia. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete. Not seeing what here meets WP:NBIO. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:22, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete. Agree with everyone else, nothing to indicate the subject is notable, and I can't find any sources of my own to back it up. OliveYouBean (talk) 07:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete per David Eppstein and other contributers here. -Roxy the dog 08:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete per David Eppstein and others here - not notable. Deus et lex (talk) 11:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete: Subject is not notable. I couldn't find relevant sources on google. - GA Melbourne (talk) 12:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NOTE: The following comment was posted by an editor who has edited this page both using the account Effortshitconsistentinvest and using IP editing, with the IP address 211.30.131.151. JBW (talk) 20:23, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whatever: Interestingly, her works in the references are all ignored. And of course you cannot find, you are dealing with a multilingual author who wrote in different languages and pen names. You need study some foreign languages before commenting on the subjects. Google knows better https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Systemic_bias 211.30.131.151 (talk) 15:12, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete. Fails WP: NPOV notability; clearly promotional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spinifex&Sand (talk • contribs) 03:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete. Google Knowledge Panel is insufficient and also always highly volatile. Admittedly, I was the original draftifier, and though the creator moved it back to mainspace I find the edits leading to that inadequate. Silikonz💬 19:23, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

UFO-Memorial Ängelholm[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL)

Article about obscure statue depends on citations to mentions in unreliable WP:FRINGE sources: a selfpub Lulu book, two UFO websites, and a book by fringe author David Hatcher Childress. It may deserve a line or two at the Ängelholm article, based on a photo listing in a cultural heritage book:[1]. - LuckyLouie (talk) 19:41, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Paranormal and Sweden. Shellwood (talk) 19:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Merge to the Angleholm article, it's a thing, but not really notable alone. Oaktree b (talk) 20:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep. OK article, and nominator doesn't much explain why it wouldn't be. The entity exists and at the specified location, and nominator hasn't claimed that that that isn't so. We have lots of articles on individual sculptures and markers, I've written a couple-few myself. Yeah they're obscure, but the're just going to be more obscure if we delete the articles on them, and how does that help our remit of taking info out of the darkness of obscurity and organizing and presenting here in order to help make the internet not suck as much. Yes the sources are obscure, but they're reliable for our purposes here; if we were using them support us saying that the memorialized event actually occurred, they would not be reliable, but we're not saying that, we're just explaining why such an entity was made. For much the same reason, fringeness doesn't much matter. And obscure yes, but certainly giving significant coverage, I mean there's an entire book about the subject, for starters (obscure, granted; but very in-depth, and reliable for our purposes of demonstrating why the entity exists).

It's on OK article, four short paragraphs, nice photo, refs, fits in Category:UFO culture for people looking thru that. Why destroy it. Daily page views is 25, I don't know why its that high, but that's a lot for an article like this. Participants here should consider the statement "Those 25 readers a day will be better served when they search on the term if they get a 404, or at any rate a redirect to a couple sentences, rather than this article, because _______". What goes in the blank? Tell me. If its compelling I'll change my mind. Can you do that? I doubt the article quality is much below our average. Article is marginal to even be brought to AfD. Keep. Herostratus (talk) 00:18, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Herostratus "The entity exists" - but you know existence is not sufficient threshold to be in Wikipedia. What makes this monument notable? As for "there's an entire book about the subject" - which book, and is it about this monument, or about the UFO incident? I have an inkling that the UFO incident may be notable, and the monument could be mentioned in such an article, but I am not seeing what makes the monument notable and deserving a stand-alone article at present. I'll note that the monument is mentioned, without sources, in Ängelholm, so yes, a merge seems an option too (and gets my vote for now as a WP:ATD). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:19, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There's nothing wrong with the article, it's just that you feel it's too obscure to bother writing about. But somebody has bothered. I get that you wouldn't and would consider it a waste of your time, but we can't control other people and what's done is done. So... " "Those 25 readers a day will be better served when they search on the term if they get a 404, or at any rate a redirect to a couple sentences, rather than this article, because _______". Fill in the blank with something compelling and I'll change my mind. Otherwise, I won't. Herostratus (talk) 11:48, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete no need to merge, there is already enough coverage of this non-notable thing in the proposed target. -Roxy the dog 08:20, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep, and preferably expand the article to also cover the supposed UFO landing it's meant to memorate. sv:Clas Svahn, a respected journalist, co-wrote an entire book about the UFO incident (Mötet i gläntan), including the monument, published in 1995 (new and expanded edition in 2015). There's this longish article in Sydsvenskan, or this one in Helsingborgs Dagblad, there have been guided tours at the monument, we have pretty long articles on restoration and upkeep of the monument, and so on. I agree with the sentiment above that the UFO sighting and the monument should be treated in one article, but based on the available sources, I'd argue the article on the monument in itself is worth keeping for the time being, due to sustained interest over time. /Julle (talk) 03:03, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep but replace the 2008 photo in the article with these two from 2021, including a drone shot: c:File:UFO-monumentet_i_Ängelholm_1.jpg and c:File:UFO-monumentet_i_Ängelholm_2.jpg. Versions of the article in other languages appear to have more information to help expand. 5Q5|^✉ 12:06, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I went ahead and replaced the outdated 2008 photo with two improved 2021 ones from the Swedish article. 5Q5|^✉ 12:51, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:22, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Keep - It's a legitimate statue and local landmark with backing from the municipality as a tourist attraction. Yes it's obscure and in Sweden, but it is a genuinely interesting article and one I imagine potential visitors to the area would read. AtFirstLight (talk) 08:25, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Please review after article expansion. A reminder this AFD isn't about a UFO encounter but about a memorial sculpture and whether or not it is notable.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well actually it's about the article. And the article is not in a straitjacket. The article is about, or at least talks about, both event and memorial. Has to. So,the part on the actual (supposed) event could be expanded (or not). The article could be renamed to "UFO incident at Ängelholm" and the part about the memorial put in a separate section (or not). Or whatever. But, just to point out, none of these improvements can happen if the article is, I don't know, erased. Right? Herostratus (talk) 20:58, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete I am not seeing any reliable sources that mention this topic (reference 1 and 5 are totally unreliable and should be removed). Psychologist Guy (talk) 16:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note: I replaced the first source after seeing this comment. Reference 5 is being used a primary source; I didn't look for a replacement because it just covers a single sentence that I'm not sure belongs in the article. The best sources in the article appear to references 8 and 9, added by Julle. These are 2 newspaper articles from a major Swedish newspaper that specifically talk about the monument, its condition, its maintenance, and the area's attitude towards it. Sadly they are both paywalled and Swedish language. Expanding that last sentence into a paragraph or two would, I think, push this easily towards keep. The Roswell incident is now largely considered to have been mundane, but the alien autopsy museum out there is still notable. Rjjiii (talk) 17:55, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Psychologist Guy: I'd argue that Sydsvenskan and Helsingborgs Dagblad are reliable? Not from the UFO angle but as the dominating newspapers in southern Sweden, which is the relevant region here. And Dick Harrison is a respected historian, here writing in Svenska Dagbladet, one of the most respected newspapers in Sweden. /Julle (talk) 17:56, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Membership[edit]

Project Userboxes

This user is a member of WikiProject Paranormal.

This user is a member of WikiProject Paranormal, which is dedicated to improving articles on paranormal subjects.

This user is a member of WikiProject Paranormal, a project dedicated to improving articles on paranormal subjects.

This user thinks you're watching them. Watch other paranormal activity at WikiProject Paranormal.

To join, sign your name at the /Participants page and add the main page to your watchlist.

Members can add {{User Paranormal1}}, {{User Paranormal2}}, {{User Paranormal3}}, {{User Paranormal4}}, or {{user paranormal}} to their user pages to identify themselves as members of the project. A list of members with these userboxes is available at Category:WikiProject Paranormal participants.

Templates[edit]

Paranormal navbar -
({{Paranormal}})

Stub templates[edit]

General stub -
{{Paranormal-stub}}
Cryptozooloogy stub -
{{Cryptozoology-stub}}, {{Cryptid-stub}}
Parapsychology stub -
{{Para-psych-stub}}
Mythology stub -
{{Myth-stub}}
{{UFO-stub}}
{{UFO-bio-stub}}
{{UFO-book-stub}}

Boilerplate templates[edit]

Feel free to use these templates where appropriate. Any major changes should be brought up on the template talk page.

WikiProject Paranormal

(Rated NA-class)

	This page falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles
NA	This article has been rated as NA-Class on the project's quality scale.

This user is a part of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the paranormal. 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.

{{blackproject}} - Notice placed on talk pages of articles that discuss black projects — "highly classified military/defense projects, unacknowledged publicly by the government, military personnel, or defense contractors"

This article deals with a military black project.

Because of the nature of such projects, the most authoritative sources (any involved governments and defense contractors) may not even acknowledge its existence. The most reliable sources may be highly speculative.

Please ensure that the article is well and reliably sourced and does not contain unverifiable information or vague predictions.
For more details, see the black project working group of the military history project.

Infoboxes templates[edit]

Paranormal terminology -
({{Infobox paranormal term}})
Cryptids and creatures/entities -
({{Infobox mythical creature}})
Abductees, contactees, writers, researchers, etc -
({{Infobox person}})
Paranormal events -
({{Infobox event}})

Barnstar[edit]

		The Paranormal Barnstar
		The Project Paranormal Barnstar, awarded to users who have made a notable contribution to the project

v t e Wikipedia help pages
*Visit the Teahouse* or the Help desk for an interactive Q & A forum. FAQs (?) Reference desks (?) Noticeboards (?) Cheatsheet (?) Directories (?)**
About Wikipedia (?)	Administration Purpose Principles Policies and guidelines What Wikipedia is not Disclaimer (parental advice) Making requests Who writes Wikipedia?
Help for readers (?)	FAQ Books Copyright Glossary Mobile access Navigation Other languages Searching Students Viewing media
Contributing to Wikipedia (?)	Advice for young editors Avoiding common mistakes Etiquette Simplified Manual of Style Simplified rule-set "Ignore all rules" "The rules are principles" Style-tips Tip of the day Your first article (article wizard)
Getting started (?)	Why create an account? Introductions by topic Graphics tutorials Picture tutorial IRC (live chat) tutorial VisualEditor user guide
Dos and don'ts (?)	Accessibility Biographies Biographies (living) Categorization Consensus Discussions Disambiguation Images Leads Links Lists References Tables Titles (of articles)
How-to pages and information pages (?)	Appealing blocks Article deletion Categories Citations/references Referencing for beginners Citation Style 1 Cite errors References and page numbers Convert Diff Editing Minor edit toolbar edit conflict Find sources Files Footnotes Image deletion Infoboxes Linking (link color) Logging in Merging Page name Renaming pages Redirect Passwords Email confirmation Reverting Simple vandalism cleanup Talk pages (archiving simple archiving) User contributions WP search protocol
Coding (?)	Wiki markup Barcharts Calculations Characters Columns Hidden text HTML Lists Magic words Music symbols Sections Sounds Tables Templates Transclusion URL Visual files
Directories (?)	Abbreviations Contents (Encyclopedia proper) Departments Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Guidelines Manual of Style Policies Tasks Tips Tools
Missing Manual Ask for help on your talk page (?)

v t e WikiProject Council
WikiProject guides	WikiProject Council Talk Guidelines/Intro WikiProjects Task forces Technical notes Assessment FAQ Work via WikiProjects
Directories and summaries	Directory Proposals Deletion Signpost Shortcuts Popular pages Database reports Watchers
Culture and the arts	Arts Music Performing Plastic Visual Broadcasting Crafts and hobbies Entertainment Games and toys Food and drink Internet culture Language and literature Biography Linguistics Media Philosophy and religion Sports
Geographical	Bodies of water Cities Countries Africa Americas Asia Europe Oceania Landforms Maps Parks, conservation areas and historical sites
History and society	History and society Business and economics Education Military and warfare Politics and government Transportation
Science, technology and engineering	Science Biology Chemistry Economics Geosciences Information science Mathematics Medicine Meteorology Physics Space Technology Time
Wikipedia assistance and tasks	Contents systems Maintenance Files Article improvement and grading Classroom projects WikiProjects

Wikipedia:WikiProject Paranormal

Goals[edit]

Scope[edit]

Categories[edit]

Recognized content[edit]

Featured articles[edit]

Featured lists[edit]

Good articles[edit]

Featured pictures[edit]

Good article nominees[edit]

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team release version selections[edit]

To-do[edit]

Article alerts[edit]

Deletion sorting[edit]

Paranormal deletion[edit]

Jenia Meng[edit]

UFO-Memorial Ängelholm[edit]

Membership[edit]

Templates[edit]

Stub templates[edit]

Boilerplate templates[edit]

Infoboxes templates[edit]

Barnstar[edit]

See also[edit]

Related WikiProjects[edit]

Tools[edit]