Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Requested articles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Requested articles
Home
Talk Backlog
Drive
Red link
Blitzes
How to
create
Requested Article
creations of the month
Members Coordinators Newsletters Mailing
list


Bot counter[edit]

Are there any available bots that could do automated counting of the number of requests on each WP:RA page? It might be as simple as counting the number of * characters on each page, and/or on each section of each page. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 20:22, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't know such a bot exists, but you can make a request at WP:BOTREQ. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 09:44, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Done, see Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 48#Count of Requested articles -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 12:52, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Although the page size gives a rough idea, I did have a thought that we could go along and number them all, by changing * to #. Not exactly a nice clean solution but it would give us a clearer idea of numbers. France3470 (talk) 18:09, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

100 articles of the week!![edit]

I while ago, i made a request to the Villagepump (proposals) page:

A discussion on Jimbo's talk page about editor apathy has just got me thinking..... the new editor situation is at critical level at the moment. People just assume that all the good ideas have already been taken, and that there's no point to edit anymore - it's too hard. Not to mention the harsh treatment that many new editors are given, driving them away. Well, what if we have a feature on the main page - right there so visitors see it straight away - which invites people to create the "Top 100 Articles of the Week" - or something like that. Haven't thought out the specifics yet. I just think that by having a discrete list of notable articles in a clear, interesting format (maybe a small engaging explanation of each article concept) would be a really great idea to solve this problem. E.g. "My name is Joe Bloggs. I was a revolutionary in the French Revolution. I wasn't very popular in my day but people now think I'm pretty influential. You can find relevant sites at __________ and _______ etc". Maybe that's a bit too informal. Maybe just: "He was a ___, he did ____, there is much criticism over ______ etc." - like a short snappy pitch to an onlooker for why they would be inspired to create the article. That way, we can be assured that a steady amount of article are being produced very so often. "100" and "week" can obviously be changed. So I think it would probably appear somewhere on the main page - maybe at the top, and list the first few entries, then say: "click here to see the rest of the bunch, just waiting for you to give them a page of their own".... or something like that. Not sure how we'd pick the 100 articles.. probably just grab a few from the Wikipedia:Requested articles or Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles pages. We can have like "Movie Weeks" and "Nature Weeks" where the articles are dedicated to a certain topic. Might be quite fun actually. Bring the excitement and enjoyment back to the project. If for no other reason, it might make the vandalism concentrated to a small amount of articles (I assume that usually a lot more than 100 articles get vandalized every week), which will make it more easily monitorable. Any thoughts?--Coin945 (talk) 1:38 am, 28 March 2012, Wednesday (2 months, 1 day ago) (UTC+8)

  • Addendum: I think also another reason why this would be a great idea is because it would channel the flow of new article creation into notable topics rather than just throwing articles against a wall and seeing what sticks (a real bitch for those overworked underpaid people at Special:NewPages).--Coin945 (talk) 2:50 am, 28 March 2012, Wednesday (2 months, 1 day ago) (UTC+8)
  • Addendum 2: Another reason I think this is a good idea is that, contrary to what people might think, newcomers on the whole really have no idea about what hidden horrors lurk beyond the mainspace, and quite frankly, I would assume that very few actually find out. Even if they did manage to find those endeless lists of pages requesitng articles, they would probably be so overwhelmed by it all - and feel that their contributions will be pointless anyways because nobody else will probably work on their article again because there are so many (I've felt like in the past). Also, they will have no way of knowing with are notable topics and which are not/not bother to find out before making the article.--Coin945 (talk) 10:15 am, 28 March 2012, Wednesday (1 month, 30 days ago) (UTC+8)
  • Addendum 3: This will also solve the porblem we have that "new people show up and Wikipedia doesn't really do a good job of suggesting what they could work on".--Coin945 (talk) 4:43 pm, 28 March 2012, Wednesday (1 month, 30 days ago) (UTC+8)

Among other comment, one was that it was an awesome idea, but that it needed a bit of a following to be put into effect on the main page. I think we can merge my idea and this group, by having the "100 articles of the week", or perhaps the "50 articles of the week to create" and the "50 articles of the week to improve"... or something like that. Knowing that there are others in your en-devour, along for the ride, gives people an awesome feeling of backup.. and not to mention focuses the project by making sure it has a goal to reach every week.--Coin945 (talk) 11:07, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

On Special:RecentChanges there is a Requests: line near the top, that is fed from Template:Recent changes article requests, which is then fed from Template:Recent changes article requests/list. That might be a good starting place for improvements of the system. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 11:27, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Blue Link Drive[edit]

The Backlog Drive page is now stubbed. A suggestion for the first drive, something that should be doable in a month: a Blue Link Drive to remove all blue link listings, and add the project template to the formerly listed articles talk pages. Cheers. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 18:43, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Category of articles[edit]

Please add Wikipedia:Requested articles/music#Discographies to the list of music related requests. My76Strat (talk) 17:11, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done Please feel free to add requests for Discographies, beacause the section is currently empty. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 09:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. I will add a few to populate the section, and then more as I see others, and I hope others will too. Again, thanks My76Strat (talk) 09:58, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Splitting very large pages[edit]

At 435,470 bytes /music/Performers, bands and songwriters makes my computer struggle. It's virtually impossible to navigate and edit; the same can be said for many of the other categories. I think we need to split them down further. Is there any objection to splitting the Performers, bands and songwriters into sections: Wikipedia:Requested articles/music/Performers, bands and songwriters/A–H, Wikipedia:Requested articles/music/Performers, bands and songwriters/I–Q, Wikipedia:Requested articles/music/Performers, bands and songwriters/R–Z, Wikipedia:Requested articles/music/Performers, bands and songwriters/0–9? France3470 (talk) 11:15, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Splitting into smaller bite-sized pages is a very good idea. I've started splitting out some sections of Natural sciences and Social sciences lists already. The Performers page is the largest in WP:RA, and doing splits by alphabet is the only easy option here. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 11:21, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Splitting some of the particularly large ones is fine so long as it's not a bunch of 5-10kb sub-articles, as that doesn't really help at all. Certainly the 350kb bio page can be split. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 18:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Size is a factor, but we should also be concerned with making single pages on a single subject that is in scope of one or more WikiProjects/TaskForces/Workgroups, etc. For example, /Sports/Wrestling is an OK split because there are a decent amount of requests, and the page would then be directly in scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling, and possibly others projects. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 19:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Another list that may be included here[edit]

There's a substantial list at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Reggae/Tasklist#Articles to start, many of which have entries in specialist reggae encyclopedias. It may be worth including this list in the Task forces section of this project. --Michig (talk) 07:12, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Feel free to edit the Task forces page with any other suggestions. -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 11:00, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Having cleaned up much of the medical disease related articles[edit]

I found that many of the request where 1) spelling mistakes 2) better as redirects (as they where historical terms or simply another name for an article we already have) 3) simply not notable / no published literature to support Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:27, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Archives[edit]

I saw a couple archive pages pop up in the last couple days, so I think it's something to be discussed. IMO, I think putting the declined requests elsewhere makes little sense, and that just removing them is the best option. Seems like others disagree, so I'm curious to see what the consensus would be; I know there's both good and bad points to having them. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:03, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I like the idea of having /Archive pages where declined requests are listed, for two reasons. First, just as a tracking mechanism, to see what type of accept/decline ratio we're dealing with. Second, and more important probably, is a protection against repeat requests. (also see Wikipedia:WikiProject Requested articles/Backlog Drive#Archive Drive) -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 19:05, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
I think great care needs to be taken in deciding that a request should be declined. If a subject is obviously not suitable for inclusion, fair enough, but there are many topics which are suitable for articles, but where sources are just hard to find, and far too many editors are sadly incapable of telling the difference. I think visibility of declined requests is therefore a very good thing. --Michig (talk) 10:22, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
When I first came across them my initial thoughts on the archives was that they weren't particularly necessary; in the past I've always just removed non-notable and unsuitable requests. However having recently tried to work though the requests more systematically I have found the idea of archiving quite appealing (and thought I would give it a try with /Songs/Archive). Yes it's more work, as ideally one should provide a reason for each decline, but at the same time it does provide transparency. It also gives a sense of process to the pages—something which as always been desperately lacking— while also hopefully making it easier to keep track of those which have been rejected. France3470 (talk) 15:35, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Template:Was requested article[edit]

At the Tasks subpage there is the question: "What should we do with Template:Was requested article ?". I think it should be deprecated in favor of {{WikiProject Requested articles}}. What does others think? Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 23:11, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree. Also, maybe should copy the |requester= and |date= options from the old template (see Talk:Harvey A. Carr for example). -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 09:22, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 {{WikiProject Requested articles}} now contains this two optional parameters. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 12:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Removed external links[edit]

These edits removed quite a few external links, at least some of which looked like good references. Should they be reverted? One of the links seems to be blacklisted, making a revert difficult. Huon (talk) 08:23, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Redlinks through AfD?[edit]

What to do with redlinks in the RA lists like Seed7 which was deleted in 2006 through an AFD? Remove the link (missing notability?)? Tagging the talk page? Commenting out? mabdul 11:34, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

How about a 'Pending Declines' section on the bottom of the page. Requests can be listed there for a while, and then moved to an /Archive page if there's no objection. See /Computer science, computing, and Internet#Pending declines for example. (Also adding link to AFD result on the request is useful). -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 11:57, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
I was preparing to link "Pending declines" as well; and this one too. Cheers - My76Strat (talk) 12:11, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

The AFD was 2006 Hans Bauer (talk) 17:24, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I said that. So? mabdul 16:18, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
No problem. I just changed 2011 to 2006, which is the year of the AFD. The short line was added, to sign my change. Hans Bauer (talk) 06:22, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Never change a comment by somebody other! Not for factual incorrectness or for grammar, or whatever. Reordering the different threads (e.g. for chronological order), blanking (because it violates our policy, esp. on private information and attacking) and archiving is totally OK, but never change a comment by somebody other. I wrote that two weeks ago and thus I simply didn't know if I wrote 2006 or 2011! mabdul 07:28, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, I was not aware of that rule. Please accept my apology. Hans Bauer (talk) 08:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Y'all might be interested in...[edit]

... this thread, which I just posted at Wikipedia talk:Requested articles. Cheers! ~ Matthewrbowker Talk to me 22:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Template:Req[edit]

Your template, {{req}}, has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.181.190 (talk) 06:45, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Passing along some feedback[edit]

As part of a conversation with a user through OTRS about the topic of suggesting articles, I was asked to share this with the editors that manage the project:

I made a second observation that I wish would be brought to the attention

of the wikipedia staff, reviewers, and board: the barriers which the average user has to scale to successfully suggest that a new topic be added to wikipedia are still very high. Please pass this along and let people know. Have members of your staff take pen names as average users and try to submit new article ideas. Have them act as naive users who don't know the ropes. Have them follow the prompts the average person would. Observe

their results and their experience.

As I've never used this venue I cannot comment on how simple or complicated it is, but there you have it. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 19:23, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Update[edit]

Hi, I am in the process of attempting to re-invigorate RA:

First, I am designing a new series of pages in my sandbox

Second, I am inviting editors to join in at RA

If you have any questions, please ask on my talk page, or ask here and give me talkback. If I get no replies, or no replies to the negative, I will start phasing in pages from my sandbox. Thanks, Matty.007 08:31, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

question[edit]

I've been mainly working with AfCs , which has certain similarities, in needing to tell if an article could possibly be written. Looking at the list, it's clear that some of these are really hopeless. I've seen some discussion about more complicated ways to deal with it., but the simplest things I can think of for now is either to remove the line altogether , or to strike it out with a word or two of explanation. Will anyone be bothered if I go ahead and do a few to experiment? DGG ( talk ) 00:12, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

To be honest, I think that that is the only way we are ever going to get through the backlog. You may want to ask this at WP:RA first though, just to get others' opinions. Thanks, Matty.007 17:28, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Jeffress Stone[edit]

Jeffress Stone is a company located in Baltimore, MD. Jeffress stone is a small business trying to get their name out. They are one of the very few company's left in the world that handcraft their own work, and customize anything, anyway. Any countertop you can dream can be designed in natural or man-made stone - marble, granite, soapstone, silestone, glassos, etc. Jeffress stone does custom work, if you're looking for a stone fireplace, you got it. If you want your bathroom finished in stone, including a new shower or bathtub, you got it. If you're looking for a dog bowl, chessboard, tables, ceilings, floors, toothbrush holder, window sills, shelving, framing, or anything you can think of- in any stone you would like. Call or email for a quote anytime, look them up @ jeffresstone.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffress Stone (talkcontribs) 15:39, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal[edit]

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia Primary School: first Calls for Articles![edit]

Hi everybody, I'm quite excited to announce the first two articles selected to kick-start the content phase of the Wikipedia Primary School project! This research project focuses on the South African primary school curriculum: the involved teams have selected a list of 100+ relevant articles which will undergo review (or creation) by Wikipedians, scholars/experts, or journals. We thought that involving the Wikipedia community was the obvious first step in the process, which is going to last for the next couple of years. So the articles we'd like to suggest for creation are:

  1. Makhonjwa Mountains;
  2. Stone-walled town of Kaditshwene.

Please see the project pages for more information and instructions, and thanks in advance for your invaluable help. Best, --Elitre (WPS) (talk) 13:00, 18 November 2014 (UTC) (I did notify the relevant wikiproject, but I hope it's ok to stop by here as well :) )

Jesmion[edit]

Jesmion at the excavative track was met with a machinery coming to him, Jesmion stop it at a distance away, and it narrated its problems to Jesmion said: am vulnerable and couldn't working, on hearing the complaint of the sun, Jesmion spoke to the sun said, be cured, automatically it got cured and happily went to work by the curing of Jesmion, Jesmion proceed its journey upto the deck and conquering, it finally used his sword and conquered a spirit name 'bitter-leave' brought it down from the height and cleared it with its sword, said to it, you are bitter-leave, and all were amazed while stay away, that was the name of the spirit: 41.206.11.35 (talk) 04:17, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Zimbabwean Bond Coins.[edit]

An article titled Zimbabwean Bond Coins needs to be created, as they are being put into circulation as currency in Zimbabwe as from 18th. of December 2014.

You can see a photo of the promotional poster here; [1] - (202.89.141.109 (talk) 19:21, 17 December 2014 (UTC))

RABBI MENACHEM MENDEL SCHNEERSON[edit]

I AM LOOKING FOR ANY ARTICLES WRITTEN BY THE ABOVE REBBE ON RELATIONS WITH MUSLIMS

THANK YOU  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.57.189.30 (talk) 03:56, 2 January 2015 (UTC) 

WikiProject X is live![edit]

WikiProject X icon.svg

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Request for article on Stayzilla.com[edit]

The request to include an article in Wikipedia on Stayzilla.com was submitted on the 20th of January. Since we would like to keep track of the progress, we would like to know what the number assigned to each link/verifiable source we provided indicates. Please let us know the information we request so that we may plan accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashwinsubram.epm (talkcontribs) 11:53, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

car parking details in stations[edit]

respected sir\please kindly submit car parking details also in railway station encyclopidea — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.79.106.8 (talk) 08:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Career path[edit]

Excuse me if I am doing this wrong, I have been editing Wikipedia since 2009 I think so I know my way around but have never listed at RA before. Over at WP:RFD#Split profession we are discussing... well, you can tell, and in discussing that, I mentioned Career path. Now it seems that article was deleted by WP:G1 "patent nonsense" in 2007 (I'm not an admin so I can't see what it said.) It seems an odd omission, but I am not capable myself of making it beyong a stub. I might have a go but I think it would be better done by someone who is more on the human resources side of things than a humble engineer like your good Wikipedian. Quite happy to bung in, do the refs and so on but not sure how I would get it started, however WP:BOLD I may be. Si Trew (talk) 14:21, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

That version was unsourced personal commentary on how to build a career path. That said, I don't think that's an appropriate topic as Wikipedia is not intended to be a how-to guide. Your better bet is to work on Career or more specifically Career counseling or the like. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:00, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia Primary School: second call for Articles![edit]

Hi everybody, as part of the content phase of the Wikipedia Primary School project, I would like to propose the creation of two articles ! The Wikipedia Primary School research project focuses on the South African primary school curriculum: the involved teams have selected a list of 100+ relevant articles, some of which will undergo review (or creation) by Wikipedias, scholars/experts, or journals. So the articles we'd like to suggest for creation are:

  1. Bolt's Farm;
  2. Minaar's cave.

Please see the project pages for more information and instructions, and thanks in advance for your invaluable help. Anthere (talk)

Heads up about a discussion[edit]

There's currently a discussion on the Requested Articles talk page about a proposed overhaul for the process at WT:WPRA#Revamp WP:RA?WT:RA#Revamp WP:RA?. Feel free to participate! APerson (talk!) 22:42, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Proper link is WT:RA#Revamp WP:RA?. ~ Matthewrbowker Drop me a note 23:25, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
D'oh. Fixed. APerson (talk!) 02:40, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

IRC[edit]

Just as a heads up, I've created a new IRC chat room to facilitate discussion among volunteers who are active in the requested article process. You can join it at #wikipedia-en-ra connect. ~ Matthewrbowker Drop me a note 05:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Drafts[edit]

Does the requested articles pages include links to drafts? Are drafts considered a requested article or just separate? I wonder about sort of taking some of these listings and creating draftspace pages on them to get them going. I may ask for a bot or someone to check the redlinks everywhere against draftspace. Any ideas? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:34, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

AFAIK, there's no relationship between draftspace and the requested-articles pages. Drafts are just that, drafts of potential articles. And I think the pages here are a lot less organized than you think. ;-) Redlinks here are sometimes in templates, sometimes not. Different templates can be used. Lists of requests are sometimes alphabetical, sometimes not. Some of the "redlinks" aren't even red. I think the majority of requests come from unregistered readers who never make another edit. Checking redlinks against articles (or draftspace) would be useful, but I'm uncertain about the efficacy of creating a bot, given the infinite variations of (mis)spellings and capitalizations possible.
On the pages I track here (which are not in the most-requested categories), I check out each request, make sure it's notable, put it in some sort of category or alphabetical order, and add any questions or information I think would help. I have yet to see any response whatsoever from requesters, but the info is there for whoever decides to create an article. Periodically, I go through and clean out redlinks that have turned blue.
If you're interested in creating some of these articles, I'd say just dive in. — Gorthian (talk) 18:01, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Well I'm just asking for a bot to prepare a list and will manually check it for now. But what about adding drafts here as a see also or something? Those articles aren't actually created and they do remain red links. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean. 1) adding drafts here —do you mean adding drafts here at WikiProject Requested Articles? I doubt that would work well. Drafts are created in Drafts namespace. 2) as a see also or something —Articles often have "See also" sections in them; is that what you're referring to? But what articles do you mean? We would never link to draft space from an article, nor are redlinks useful in "See also" sections. — Gorthian (talk) 19:48, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
I revised this link to make the red link more obvious and the book link separate. In the same vein, we could add redlink - see draft link if the draft exists. A number of draftspace pages are incomplete anyways so if there's even a small chance at another eye to a draft, I think that's better than saying removing it from WP:RA because the draft exists. I can see arguments for either side. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
I see what you mean now. I don't think anyone would advocate removing a link just because a draft exists. I'm not sure that adding "see draft" next to a redlink would do the readers a service, though. Drafts come in all states: partial but good quality, half-assed but long, abandoned halfway through, stubblike, etc. Keep in mind that it's the readers who make most of these requests (and my impression is they aren't interested in creating articles themselves); we don't want to point them at an "article" that's not yet been vetted for quality. Editors, on the other hand, might be grateful to know about the draft, as something they could work with. It might help if you could provide lists of drafts to a relevant WikiProject (Mathematics, in this case) instead of here. — Gorthian (talk) 00:56, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
I'd think the projects would be aware of drafts, assuming they are tagged properly. For example Category:Draft-Class mathematics pages exists. It seems like a draft is middle-ground between a requested article and an actual completed article. If the project wanted to expand to include the actual requested articles then it would grow to include quite a number of user and draftspace pages (and if kept afterwards, stub/start/C/B/GA/FA, etc.) -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:16, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Requested articles/Assessment[edit]

Would anyone object if I requested a speedy deletion of Wikipedia:WikiProject Requested articles/Assessment? Some spammer seized the opportunity to crow, and we don't do article assessments here anyway.— Gorthian (talk) 01:29, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. — Gorthian (talk) 19:58, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Companies page size[edit]

The Companies page is getting big. Perhaps time to split into multiple pages? See Companies talk page. Cheers. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 12:37, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Stubs for creation[edit]

Stubs for creation (SFC) is a proposed task force for Articles for creation. SFC will assist new editors in creating useful stubs on notable subjects. Please feel free to discuss and expand on the idea at Draft:Stubs for creation. Cheers! -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 08:14, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Topics for creation in Village pump (idea lab)[edit]

(Formerly discussed above as Stubs for creation, the idea has been updated into...) Topics for creation (TFC) is a proposed project to fill the gap between Requested articles and Articles for creation by assisting editors in preparing a list of independent, reliable sources on a requested topic. Please feel free to join the preliminary discussion at Village pump (idea lab)#Topics for creation. Thanks. -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 12:58, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


Dead project[edit]

The deletion page suggests that you can request articles be created here. This article is incomprehensible and user unfriendly, and the supposed project co-ordinator is a retired wikipedian. I can't believe I have donated hundreds of dollars to this website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:0:1003:1007:F5BF:4AF6:86F3:A20E (talk) 16:00, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

@2620:0:1003:1007:F5BF:4AF6:86F3:A20E: Thank you for you feedback. Is there a specific article you'd like to request? I can add it for you if you'd like. ~ Matthewrbowker Drop me a note 18:17, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Frustrations galore![edit]

Hi, I am but an ad-hoc editor who likes to create new articles. I have had a frustrating time using the Wikipedia:Requested articles for creating new articles. I have come across a lot of redlinked articles that already exist on Wikipedia. I am coming across more suggestions for not notable people, topics etc. than I can remember. Now, before anyone tries the editing is challenging... line with me, let me explain that I think these suggestions are more part of gaming Google Page Rank, which in turn is part of Digital marketing strategies. Now getting to my point, can someone design / suggest a bot that can pick up all suggestions on this page and spit out the relevant Wikipedia article? Seriously, I don't want to create articles because the requester wants to link to a Wikipedia article with specific words in the title, while a simple google search can point out the correct article.--Wikishagnik (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Help[edit]

After jumping from page to page for an hour, I still do not know how to request a translation. The article I'd like to have an English version of is https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%88%E6%96%87. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Backinstadiums (talkcontribs) 09:56, 19 November 2017 (UTC)