Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink/Herbs and Spices task force
|WikiProject Food and drink / Herbs and Spices||(Rated Project-class)|
- 1 Old discussions
- 2 Project directory
- 3 Wikipedia Day Awards
- 4 Expansion to the spices article
- 5 Do we have a Project tag for Talk Pages??
- 6 Format of main page
- 7 Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme
- 8 Inactive project
- 9 Herbs & spices template
- 10 Userboxxes
- 11 Too wide
- 12 TfD nomination of Template:Spices
- 13 TfD nomination of Template:Herbs
- 14 TfD nomination of Template:Herb and spice mixtures
- 15 Coordinators' working group
- 16 WP 1.0 bot announcement
- 17 Herbs and Spices articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
- 18 Trade and use of saffron FAR
This looks great, i hope i can write something about spices soon for this. But i think one thing is may be missing in your template, especially for herbs: a section about the active components in a plant: for example menthol in peppermint. I would really like to see such info in the articles.
- You can add this to the template if you like, please go ahead. dave 06:38, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
And what should we do with spices that have medical uses also, for example Sage or Cinnamon? Will we really need Sage(spice), Salvia officinalis(herb) Salvia officinalis(plant)? This example is extra complicated because there are more than one Salvia species that has medical uses.
- I would have one article that is the "culinary"-related page. In other words it would talk about the flavour, smell, uses, storage, and all other things to do with sage or cinnamon. This would be called sage (spice). Another article could "mention" the medicinal use, or have an entire section devoted to medicinal uses. The one advantage of this is that it allows us to easily port the (spice) pages to the wikipedia cookbook later, if the time ever comes for that. dave 06:38, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
But i'm looking forward to contribute. Lady Tenar
As an interested editor, I really think splitting things up into multiple (herb) and (plant) pages is adding extra confusion. I would much rather see a concerted effort to keep things together. Putting mace on a separate page that refers to nutmeg is reasonable, but two separate pages for basil? WormRunner 07:04, 17 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Suggest something on the spices and herbs template. Perhaps a section which describes the plant that the spice comes from? This is kind of how it is done in spice books usually. For now I'll just play it by ear and make articles based on the template. So modify the template, we'll debate it, and use that for any future spice/herb articles. We can always change things around later anyways. Thanks for your interest in helping fix up all the spice articles~ dave 06:38, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
But Gernot Katzer's page is pretty close to a definitive source. - Burschik
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 20:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia Day Awards
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 22:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Expansion to the spices article
Do we have a Project tag for Talk Pages??
I see we have userboxes for user talk pages but there doesn't appear to be a Project tag for use on Article talk pages. Is it possible to make one for use? There are many articles that could fall under this project's jurisdictin that would not be of interest to other projects or at least don't seem to be.LiPollis 06:36, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Anybody home on this project? I'd really like to do some work on these subjects but could use some guidance.LiPollis 12:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- The banner is at [[Template:WPHS]]. John Carter 18:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Format of main page
I may have bumped into a few of you on here and as such you may know I work extensively on WikiProject Food and Drink which is the parent project to this one. As such, I have in an attempt to revive some of the other projects which have softened by revamping their main pages and adding subsidiary pages for better organization and appeal. Now this project may not necessarily at this point need appeal for new members, but it can never hurt. It will also give the page an ease of use for places to click and get templates along with info on merge proposals, deletion proposals, and other information on the project.
As this project is very active I wanted to talk here first about helping the project by putting it along the format which WikiProject Food and Drink, Wikiproject Wine, WikiProject Foodservice and WikiProject Cheeses are currently under. I'm still finalizing Foodservice and I am offering the same to the remaining projects under Food and Drink as well. Please take a look at the other pages and tell me what you think when you get a chance.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 03:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Updated.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 23:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme
- The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
- The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
- A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:46, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
This sibling project to WikiProject Food and Drink appears to be inactive. In order to get more attention to this subject I was wondering if the members of this project would like to be incorporated back into the parent project as a taskforce which we have recently done with booth WikiProject Foodservice and Wikiproject Cheeses.--Chef Tanner (talk) 17:13, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Herbs & spices template
- Do not merge Herbs & spices template (original version) with herb and spice mixtures template (original version). The new, merged version (link), imposed today without discussion nor consensus, is too large.
- If you want a template that is extremely huge for articles that are sometimes very short (see Mitmita, for example), you could for example merge the wines template with the beers template, or in fact all the alcoholic beverages templates into a single one; you could similarly merge the citrus sodas template with all the other soft drink templates; or for that matter merge all the food and drink templates together. However, we try to keep templates to a reasonable size. "Herbs and spices" and something different: "Herb and spice mixtures" are discrete items and the template sizes, though a bit large for each, are manageable on their own. Badagnani (talk) 04:34, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
- I agree that the mixtures and the plain herbs should be separated. I also agree that the template is larger than some of the articles. If we were to merge the two, then leave one half collapsed (using CSS) and the other half visible (again using CSS). That way both parts would be there, but only the applicable one would be visible at first. For example, garlic would be better as a plain herb, but it's also a component of several mixtures. Therefore, when a reader sees the template, only the plain herbs should be visible by default, but he or she could click "view" to see the mixtures. On the other hand, some spices are never commonly included in mixtures, so it's not always necessary to include both. What about a third template that transcludes both the separate templates together so they appear as a single one. Then you could use template #1 for single spices, #2 for mixtures, and #3 (the template that uses both #1 and #2) to display both. If they are all merged together, then there has to be a bunch of parser function magic to make it all work. If they are kept separate, then we can avoid that. --Willscrlt (Talk) 20:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
- The subject items in these templates are integrally intertwined, by combining the template we put these related items together in a single location for ease in editing as well as placing them in a single grouping for readers to easily investigate.
- Having a single template keeps articles neater, requiring a single template on an article instead of two.
- The argument against having a large template on a stub is spurious in nature, there are hundreds of example of this on WP. The trick is to set the default configuration to have the template collapsed, which was my intention before Badgnani's intervention.
- The comparisons made are poor examples. The sets that he mentions are huge in comparison to this template. It is comparing apples to oranges.
- Some of the articles in the templates are inappropriate and need to be removed, including several herbs and spices articles that only concern medicinal related articles.
- Some links need to be condensed down or removed entirely, I was also on track to do this when Badagnani intervened. There were several examples such as black, white and green pepper which all linked to the same article or spice mixtures such as Shake and Bake which do not belong. No one had attempted to do this in the months or years since these were created.
- Merge -
isn't this the exact same conversation we are having at WikiProject Food and Drink and people stated that for taskforces this is fine with everyone, it is just the child projects people are having issues with? Having this conversation here is taking the whole issue out of context of the project, this page is not a project, it is a taskforce. I commented off topic I think, I still agree with the merge because of the redundancy of the two templates. The template also collapses until a user opens it on an article, so I don't see a problem with its size.--Chef Tanner (talk) 21:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
While it is the proper page, it is inactive for all intents and purposes, with me, you and Chris the only ones who monitor it. I believe it will be a stalemate, even with the link on the main talk page, however I will comment here. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 06:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
- You're not the only three who monitor it. I'm a member, too, and I monitor it. There just hasn't been much to monitor for quite a while. Keep the conversations here and promote it. As Badagani says below, it's a good way to draw more interest here. :-) --Willscrlt (Talk) 20:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - There is no problem with cross-posting notices of this discussion in various places. Perhaps it would generate more members of the Herbs and Spices task force. Badagnani (talk) 06:20, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - That is not permissible because discussion is currently split 50/50 and no consensus exists. Consensus is a fundamentally important part of our (Wikipedia) process; please use and adhere to it. Badagnani (talk) 23:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
- No consensus means that your proposal to keep doesn't stand, not the status quo. This is S.O.P. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 23:15, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - Consensus was needed before your aggressive imposition of this sweeping change, not after. And such a consensus did not, and does not exist. Please adhere to the use of Discussion and consensus, which is a fundamental part of our (WP) process. Badagnani (talk) 23:17, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
With the change, the entire page is about 33% too wide to view without scrolling from right to left. Please return to the version that ensures that the entire page may be viewable from right to left without scrolling. Badagnani (talk) 20:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
TfD nomination of Template:Spices
Template:Spices has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 09:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
TfD nomination of Template:Herbs
Template:Herbs has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 09:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
TfD nomination of Template:Herb and spice mixtures
Template:Herb and spice mixtures has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 09:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
WP 1.0 bot announcement
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Herbs and Spices articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Herbs and Spices articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback! For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:07, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Trade and use of saffron FAR
I have nominated Trade and use of saffron for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:18, 19 February 2015 (UTC)