![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
FEEDBACK HERE IS NOW CLOSED FOR VERSION 0.8. Thank you for giving us a lot of useful comments! If you missed the deadline, please contact us on the main
Version 1.0 Team talk page.
Please leave feedback here regarding the Version 0.8 offline selection. If you are representing the views of a WikiProject, please mention that, and add a link back to the relevant discussion.
We will review all comments here and usually follow the advice of the WikiProjects. Occasionally, of course, there may be conflicting views, in which case members of the 1.0 team will use their judgement. Walkerma ( talk) 03:09, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
I'll start out by state that I am not a representative of WP: Aviation, and thus my feedback is not of the project's overall generation but of my own personal views. I noticed an announcement by your selection bot asking for feedback, and after reviewing the list of aircraft, there are a few choice items that you may wish to add to the 0.8 Version within this subject. I believe it would be expressly important to include aircraft of a famed and unique nature: the already selected Concorde being the most obvious example that comes to mind. Two articles show promise in my opinion, the British Aerospace Sea Harrier (The famed 'Harrier jump-jet' in its most well known form, one of very few mainstream V/STOL jets and the most successful) and the Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey (the first mainstream tilt-rotor aircraft, crossing the line between helicopter and plane). Including these unique aircraft could help broaden the horizon of possibilities for those with an interest in the field yet with limited resources available, they're both articles of a high quality and are of GA class as of current revisions. In my opinion, they're worthy inclusions. Kyteto ( talk) 13:54, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
For consideration:- BOAC Flight 712 (GA) and Jane Harrison (GC) (Start). The accident led to the only George Cross directly awarded to a woman in peacetime. Mjroots ( talk) 10:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music will post revision IDs we want to replace the selected versions here as we come upon them:
- WesleyDodds ( talk) 13:08, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
I had tagged this article Immaculate Conception for clean up and citation but an editor has removed the tags without any substantial improvement. The content is factored with WP:OR and needs quite a bit of clean up. Malke 2010 ( talk) 23:03, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
I can leave a message on the WikiProject Catholicism. I'm a member of that Project. How do I go back and look through all the versions? Also, just because History2007 has been obsessively editing there doesn't mean he's been doing a good job. He's a belligerent editor who drives other editors away. I can show you diffs from several pages, all with the same uncivil, straw man arguments. Please tell me how I can go through all the history. Thanks. Malke 2010 ( talk) 05:25, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Must be that time of year - another release to keep us on our toes, here's a couple of updated id's - by the way is there any particularly useful format you would like these in? Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 23:16, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Genetic testing oldid=385440044 (current version - removes test edit)
In my view, articles that have scored too high are:
Missing KEY articles about Christianity: (Comments and corrections to status added in parentheses by Walkerma)
As well as may, many others. I think many of the articles about "specific individuals", specially almost living ones, should take a backseat to doctrinal issues like the Trinity. Overall, I think the ratings are random at best and the addition of Christian metal over doctrinal articles reflects that. History2007 ( talk) 23:17, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
[1]. It's very well written and with reliable sources. I'd shorten the lead a bit, deleting out the mission bit, but otherwise the article reads very well. It could stand a few more pictures which I could recommend. If you want to include Immaculate Conception I'm working on a complete rewrite with another editor. Thanks.20:28, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Add:
Remove:
Review comments: Many of these are ranked quite low, but seem to reflect a consensus from the WikiProject; I appreciate the aim of getting a more worldwide viewpoint.
Having reviewed the list of articles provided here for Wikipedia:WikiProject Riverina, can I highly recommend adding the article on Wagga Wagga. It is the largest city in the Riverina region, larger than both Albury, New South Wales and Griffith, New South Wales which have been included. It is also at "GA-class" standard, whereas Griffith and Albury are only "B-class" articles. Wagga Wagga is more historically significant than Albury and Griffith and clearly more economically significant than Griffith.
Other than Wagga Wagga, I don't see any standout omissions. I consider that the list is a reasonable selection and all are worthy of inclusion. However, if one article must be removed from the list to see Wagga Wagga included, I would recommend removing Griffith, New South Wales. Please let me know if you require further information. -- Mattinbgn ( talk) 00:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I am not sure if I agree with the list at the article list. First the choice of Horatio Hornblower. Though he may be more popular as a page, Patrick O'Brian's Aubrey-Maturin series is largely considered to be a better representation of a historical novel by naval historians and literary critics, when they become familiar with him, immediately place much greater praise on those books. Also, I think the quality of the Aubrey-Maturin series article is much better quality than the Horatio Hornblower article, with far less lists of trivia and more important Real World information with scholarly background.
Also, A Farewell to Arms is not in very good shape. That article needs some serious overhaul and definitely should be co. Catch-22, Slaughterhouse-Five and Gone with the Wind have some serious OR issues, even though, from a quick glance, they seem to be well within standard literary practice for original research.
Ones that I think should be released:
Article that probably needs some work before release:
Articles that definitely shouldn't be released in the state they are in now:
Sadads ( talk) 00:14, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
These good and featured articles should be added:
-- ErgoSum• talk• trib 00:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
These good articles should be added:
-- ErgoSum• talk• trib 00:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I request you use this version of Greenwich Mean Time because one of two contradictory claims is removed in the later version, and the other claim is softened. In short, the Interpretation Act 1978 that determines the legal meaning of certain words in the UK states that "whenever an expression of time occurs in an Act, the time referred to shall, unless it is otherwise specifically stated, be held to be Greenwich mean time." No one knows if this is the same as Coordinated Universal Time. If leap seconds are eliminated, as is currently proposed, the difference between UTC and the actual mean time at Greenwich will gradually become more and more noticeable to the "man on the street". Considering the controversy surrounding the leap second proposal, the article should not make any statement either way about what GMT means.
The claim that has been softened is "It is arguably the same as Coordinated Universal Time (UTC)" with the change from the proposed V 0.8 version underlined. Also, a claim that Greenwich mean time is the legal time in the UK has been deleted. This is appropriate in case the UK authorities eventually decide that UTC is what was really meant in the Interpretation Act.
To confirm there is indeed uncertainty, see the paper "The Debate over UTC and Leap Seconds" by David Finkleman, John H. Seago & P. Kenneth Seidelmann, presented at AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, 2 - 5 August 2010, Toronto, Ontario Canada. The paper states in section F2 "In other countries where UTC is the explicit legal basis, there may be political obstacles or questions about changing UTC. The very title 'Coordinated Universal Time' expresses the requirement to track Earth rotation: nations adopting UTC broadcasts as their statutory or regulatory standard understood UTC to be a realization of Universal Time in title and purpose upon official adoption, and the obligation to keep pace with Earth rotation has never been repealed." Jc3s5h ( talk) 00:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Better version of Philippines article is the more recent Revision 385376960 by ElockidAlternate 16:01, 17 September 2010 – Removes dubiously related original research. Should replace Revision 383673037 by Chipmunkdavis 17:01, 8 September 2010. — Lambanog ( talk) 01:18, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi all - first a quick thank you for doing this task, and a comment that overall the NZ list looks a good one. There are a couplke of articles which seem to be glaring ommissions, though:
I also think it's a little odd that three of the country's regions have listed articles (Waikato, Manawatu-Wanganui, and West Coast), whereas none of the others do. This may be a problem with the assessment by WPNZ, however - to my untrained eye the articles on Canterbury Region and Otago Region (both classed as "Start") look better than the one on West Coast Region (classed as "B").
I realise everyoine from every WikiProject's going to have suggestions on what could and could not go into v0.8, but I'd suggest trimming out the three Regions and just keeping the Regions of New Zealand article, and adding in the three others I named. Grutness... wha? 01:25, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Include:
Exclude:
Adabow ( talk · contribs) 00:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I've responded on the v0.8 talk page, but I'll bite here, too.
I'd also be tempted to add New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act 1987 (surprisingly, only 518 pts). Other than that, I agree pretty much with Avenue's and Adabow's comments above. Grutness... wha? 04:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
One thing uniquely Kiwi are Māori electorates. That article isn't very comprehensive, though. I've recently written First Māori elections, which goes a lot more into the historical context of that issue. It's quite new and I don't know where the score that the toolserver lists show comes from. Both have a relatively low score of 225, so are way below the cut off for articles that have been chosen (>1050). Ok, I'm probably biased, but one of those articles should be added. Schwede 66 06:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Suggest you add:
White there are some quality problems with some of the other articles, I think they are a good list in terms of importance. hamiltonstone ( talk) 01:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I notice that all of these articles - other than your art article - are very weak on references. The Bonner article could be included if it were a much stronger article, but its scoring on other parameters is also low. Namatjira does rather better, so I think we can include that as well as the art article. Freeman was autoselected. Many thanks, Walkerma ( talk) 04:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
I reviewed this list. I would suggest deleting Charles Mackerras, which is not a very good article and also not an important article to our project. Instead, I would add D'Oyly Carte Opera Company, Trial by Jury and The Pirates of Penzance. You might also want to include George Grossmith. Looking at other projects, I see that you are pretty much including all the FA and GA articles. You might want to include all of our FA and GA articles? Best regards, -- Ssilvers ( talk) 01:41, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I've browsed over the titles (haven't looked at the articles to check their quality), but seeing as how my choice use for the software would be to allow children to browse with the comfort that they are not online, I'd expect to find both an array of well-known fishes as well as a couple lesser-known amazing ones.
Angelfish - Extremely well-known.
Bass - Anyone who goes fishing would appreciate this one.
Chinese algae eater - Popular in aquariums, this is a weird fish that sticks to the side of a tank with its mouth, keeping the rocks and glass clean.
Clownfish - Very well-known fish, a favorite among kids. I'm surprised it's not on the list.
Manta Ray - Gigantic thing that hardly looks like a fish, and it can jump out of the water to look around. Kids love this one, too.
Oarfish - The longest fish there is, and it's pretty spiffy-looking, too.
Psychedelic Frogfish - Not particularly well-known, but a very notable fish for being so weird. Kids would love reading about a fish that can inflate and deflate its face, swim like a bouncing beachball or by using jet propulsion, blend in with pinstripe pajama camouflage, and crawl into tiny holes with its armlike fins.
Sawfish - Seriously, what kid doesn't love a shark with a gigantic serrated blade on its snout?
Since Northern Pike is already included, I'm not sure Esox is necessary, but that's just me.
And, that's my two cents. Bob the Wikipedian ( talk • contribs) 01:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The musicals project doesn't cover musical films, so any of those are incorrectly tagged. Why are you including C-class and start-class articles? I wouldn't include those? -- Ssilvers ( talk) 01:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Walkerma ( talk) 03:02, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
I think you should use a new version of the Gaborone page. The information on the old revision is outdated, and the newer one has a lot more references and correct information. ethansmith | talk to me. 01:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Suggest you use this version, in which I have reverted some vandalism. hamiltonstone ( talk) 02:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Every article in Baseball Category, the 50 we selected should be on the list. Along with our FAs and GAs. Secret account 02:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
A newer version of the Kevin Rudd article should be used, since if I am reading the list correctly, the selected version of that article shows that he is still Prime Minister of Australia, which is emphatically not the case now. Perhaps a newer version of Julia Gillard should be added as well, since her situation has changed dramatically since she became the Prime Minister on 24 June. Graham 87 03:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I propose List of dinosaurs be removed from the selection as it claims to be a complete list but is rather controversial and never completely up-to-date.
In its place, I nominate Gideon Mantell, the first paleontologist to work with dinosaurs (with the exception of his wife, who, unfortunately, has no article at all on Wikipedia?!?). Bob the Wikipedian ( talk • contribs) 03:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
May I suggest a few individual mill articles for consideration for inclusion?
Thanks for your time. Mjroots ( talk) 04:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
There seems to be a total lack of modern textile mills (post 1850) {{ Lancashire Cotton}} {{ Lancashire Cotton Corporation}} refer. As the driving force of the industrial revolution- and the economic development of nineteenth and twentieth century: this omission seems strange.
-- ClemRutter ( talk) 08:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
For the most part I think the selection chosen is fine (though sadly many of these crucially important articles are pretty shoddy), but I have a few comments on the list:
Cheers, jacobolus (t) 04:36, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest using the following versions of Red, Yellow, Green, and Blue since we in the Color Project just added greatly expanded definitions of these colors in the four major color systems--RGB, CMYK, NCS, and Munsell, so they contain a lot more information about the colors:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Red&oldid=392739331
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Yellow&oldid=392738567
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Green&oldid=392737716
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Blue&oldid=392736709
I would suggest using the following version of Purple because it now includes the Munsell color purple which is important to include because Munsell is one of the major color systems:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Purple&oldid=392702297
I think that Cyan and Magenta should DEFINITELY be included because it is important to include all of the three primary colors used in printing--yellow, cyan and magenta.
I also think that web colors and the list of colors, as well as Gold (color) should DEFINITELY be included. A lot of people use the web colors and everyone has a strong interest in the list of colors. The list of colors article gets an average of about 7,500 views per day, which is a large amount for a Wikipedia article.
http://stats.grok.se/en/201010/List_of_colors
The article on the color gold has a lot of interesting information about the color gold in the "gold in human culture" section.
Jacobolus writes most of the content of the articles on color theory and since 2006 I have written most of the content of the articles on the colors themselves. It is mostly us two who edit and add most of the content to the color articles. Another person named Pale Aqua creates the templates that are used to display the colors; she is a highly skilled computer programmer from England. Another person named VMS Mosaic does a lot of work patrolling the articles against vandalism. A person named Dicklyon checks for scientific accuracy. So it is mostly just we five people in the Color Project.
Anyway, I hope you will go with my suggestions.
Best wishes, Keraunos ( talk) 07:20, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
That's all, I think. Thanks _dk ( talk) 06:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Re the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poetry recommendations, I think these articles are in too rough a state to submit - they haven't been seriously edited or had substantive content added edited for years.
I would suggest instead:
Most of the class assessments are very out of date. This is just an individual take, I'm not speaking on behalf of anyone else. Thanks Spanglej ( talk) 07:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Further nominating, in their version as of 07:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC):
And an info: Walvis Bay and Lüderitz have been downgraded to "High". -- Pgallert ( talk) 07:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Work in progress, have done some streamlining in introduction and will do more work on risk factors/epidemiology RSN. Will let you know about progress. Richiez ( talk) 08:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
For the most part, the selection chosen seems to be fine. However, I would take a more recent revision of the main Avatar: The Last Airbender article, as some of the content has significantly changed since the revision currently selected for Version 0.8. — Parent5446 ☯ ( msg email) 08:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Selected version has a little formatting issue in "FDA approved indications" section, possibly more. Richiez ( talk) 08:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Article assessment for WikiProject South Africa is still very poor, but I believe the following articles could be considered for inclusion in Release version 0.8
-- NJR_ZA ( talk) 09:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The articles chosen seem to be biased towards military ships. We need some merchant ships, the glamorous and the not-so-glamorous. Therefore I submit for consideration
These should address the balance a bit. Mjroots ( talk) 10:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Houston Stewart Chamberlain seems significantly overscored. The article is of very low importance as regards Richard Wagner, and of virtually nil importance as regards Opera (of which WP Wagner is an offshoot) or music. He is a pretty obscure figure (regardless of one's views of his opnions) and certainly doesn't deserve to be in Wikipedia 0.8!! -- Smerus ( talk) 12:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
On a separate manner, I note that three of the four Ring operas are included. This makes the selection look very haphazard. Siegfried (opera) should be handled in the same way as Das Rheingold, Die Walküre and Götterdämmerung - all in, or all out. If they are to be included, then they need a quick going over. All four rely entirely on the two composition of the Ring articles for details of the individual works' composition. I'll have a quick hack at them to include some info and then let you know which version to use.-- Peter cohen ( talk) 21:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
On the other hand, Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg has improved since it was last assessed. I have now upgraded it to a B and it should be included in the build.-- Peter cohen ( talk) 19:26, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
The project also supports the inclusion of Cosima Wagner, the BP of Wagner's second wife who presided over the Bayreuth Festival for many years after his death.-- Peter cohen ( talk) 19:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
All the above reflects conversations at the project talk page Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Richard Wagner#Richard Wagner articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release-- Peter cohen ( talk) 00:55, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
OK thanks, this is very helpful! I would have expected us to be including all four parts of the ring cycle (the bot doesn't know they are linked!), but it seems as if we'll have to wait for the next release for you to knock those into shape. At least we have Der Ring des Nibelungen. I agree with your suggestions of Cosima Wagner and Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg, these look to be an excellent choice. Regarding Houston Stewart Chamberlain, I think I'll leave him in; it's hard to remove an article that is of interest to several diverse WikiProjects, because one may say "that doesn't matter" while another may disagree strongly (though it's true that no one rates it as very important). Also, the stats are very clear and consistent, with a steady 4-5000 people a month reading the article even going back to 2008. There are articles on him in Latvian, Bulgarian, Farsi, Japanese and many more, suggesting a worldwide importance. So I think I'm going to play safe and leave that one in. Many thanks for your great feedback. Walkerma ( talk) 04:14, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
I can suggest:
Macdonald-ross ( talk) 12:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
As our project determines any updated article revisions that should be included for release, they will be posted here:
Many thanks! Walkerma ( talk) 04:32, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Most of the articles I'm not that familiar with (not being core Venezuela topics), but
So, suggestions for inclusion:
Rd232 talk 16:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello, a bot recently asked our project to review articles for inclusion in the next release of wikipedia. There are three omissions from our project that I feel should be included. Most importantly, the article Indiana should be included (thats kind of a no brainer). Secondly History of Indiana, Indiana General Assembly, and Battle of Corydon deserve inclusion over some of the other picks. At minimum Indiana is a must have topic. Thanks — Charles Edward ( Talk | Contribs) 17:00, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I have reviewed all the articles in question. Many articles listed are not of particularly important value or quality.
The following articles may be removed from the list, unless they are they for another project:
These article I think are not of sufficient quality to merit inclusion, in addition to some not being notable enough. Please remove them from the list as well
There are a few articles not included in the list should be, some are pretty obvious
— Charles Edward ( Talk | Contribs) 14:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks for taking the time. Walkerma ( talk) 03:20, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Somerset#Somerset articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release. I clicked on the link for project articles requiring cleanup, however this didn't seem to have anything related to Somerset. Is this a bug in the process or am I doing something wrong?— Rod talk 17:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I was interested to read the selections for Greater Manchester articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release and while I appreciate it is done to a formula, consider it to be unduly weighted toward football articles, particularly related to Manchester United. I like football but think, considering the scope of FA and GA articles written by WikiProject Greater Manchester participants and other editors, the selection is flawed. In fact I would replace any C class article in the list with any GA or Fa article from the project.
Perhaps you might initially consider these:
River Mersey could be replaced by River Irwell reason, better quality article which is more relevant to several boroughs in Greater Manchester. Manchester United F.C. Reserves and Academy could be replaced with Belle Vue Zoological Gardens reason too many Manchester United articles, this one is short and mostly lists. Phil Neville could be swapped for Scout Moor Wind Farm, a FA quality article. Gary Neville could be replaced by Manchester Ship Canal or Trafford Park.
I appreciate the football lobby won't agree, but really Greater Manchester is a much bigger topic. This is my view, not the project view.-- J3Mrs ( talk) 18:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Considerable work has been done on Denton, Texas since the October 2009 version that was selected.
Please use this revision (385032628) for Denton, Texas in the WikiProject Dallas and WikiProject Texas groups. -- Mahanga ( Talk) 21:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Please include the article Spider anatomy (which is a sub-article of Spider) in Wikipedia Version 0.8. Otherwise your selections are fine. Ryan Kaldari ( talk) 22:05, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Like
last time, it would probably be better to use
furry convention and/or
fursuit rather than
anthropomorphism, which is well-linked, but still not a very good article.
Furry fandom (which was also selected) contains sufficient information to understand anthropomorphism in the context of the fandom.
GreenReaper (
talk)
22:07, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I would like to suggest Bristol Old Vic and Bristol Bus Boycott, 1963 as worthy candidates. Jezhotwells ( talk) 23:00, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I have taken a look at this list an noticed some article which assessment didn't add up:
Their assessment wasn't right and I think they should not be in the listing
Articles missing in the listing are:
Good luck -- Mdd ( talk) 23:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The following articles are not of sufficient interest to WP:WPO to be included in Version 0.8: Andrea Bocelli, Her Majesty's Theatre, Jay Pritzker Pavilion and Falsetto. In addition, Die Walküre has been erroneously tagged with the WPO banner as well as the banner of our Richard Wagner sub-project. We are currently discussing suitable replacements for these and other fringe articles listed in our table. -- Guillaume Tell 23:56, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I am surprised Prem Rawat articles are being considered for inclusion on V. 0.8. Although Prem Rawat was notable as a young guru in the 70s and early 80s, for many years now, in spite of tremendous efforts by his remaining supporters, he has not been included in any reliable sources. Activity on the articles is very quiet except when current supporters try to edit the articles to present their guru in a better light.-- John Brauns ( talk) 10:51, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I cannot for the life of me figure out why the Prem Rawat series of articles has been selected for inclusion on V. 0.8. For years now, the editing of the Prem Rawat articles has been one of the most contentious in the Biography of Living Persons category and these articles are not good examples of cooperative, accurate, informational Wikipedia writing. The only reason the articles were placed in the WikiProject section was because pro-Rawat editors have been unable and unwilling to cooperate with uninvolved editors through two lengthy ARBCOMs, and many attempts at mediation that were fruitless. Moreover, there are plenty of other biographies that would serve to educate the general public other than information about a New Religious Movement/cult leader. I'm interested in knowing what criteria has been used to make this dubious choice and an explanation would be most appreciated. Sylviecyn ( talk) 17:43, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, you may want to consider Maya stelae for the release, it's a new article but already fairly complete and of high importance within WikiProject Mesoamerica. Best regards, Simon Burchell ( talk) 12:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, i'm representing WikiProject Darts and have a suggestion regarding our project.
Thanks. Mr.Kennedy1 talk guestbook 15:15, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I cannot get the "list of articles" to show up on any of my computers (maybe the toolserver is over-loaded at the moment)? Could someone on the v0.8 team check to ensure that the Criticism of religion article is in the list? I think it is "B" rated and High priority. It is also within the Religion project, and is highly rated there, also. -- Noleander ( talk) 16:35, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I tried to use the tool server, and I don't see any articles listed yet from this project. It is still in work? -- Noleander ( talk) 16:38, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I think the articles on Transcendental Meditation movement and Transcendental Meditation technique are probably the two most important articles not included in the release version, although I don't know the subject so well as to say whether they are more important, as separate articles, than other topics also not included. John Carter ( talk) 19:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Clicking on the link to give the list of articles produces no list. The link gives a toolkit with no information whether the Glifing project has to generate its own list or whether no article merits inclusion. Since Gliding is a featured article, the second interpretation seems unlikely. Puzzled. JMcC ( talk) 21:34, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure how this is done but I was once embarrassed by a typo in a article I was "watching" and discovered that just before it hit "featured article" someone had changed a BC date to an AD date which was mortifying to insiders.
At some close delta to "publish" the article(s) should be fully protected with only a single editor/admin able to make changes. Edit "suggestions" which s/he should take lightly, can be made on the discussion page. No reason it can't go out with "simple" errors. They all do. But the gross ones (vandalism sometimes) can be eliminated in this fashion. If you haven't made plans to do this already. Student7 ( talk) 22:50, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I think this Wikipedia 0.8 offline release is a great idea, but it would seem that most of the WP:Energy recognised content is not being included. For example, apparently only 12 of our 45 GAs are to be included, see [3]. I therefore propose that an additional 12 energy GAs be added to the 0.8 release, all with a selection score above 740: My comments are added after the article names, with my general response below the list. Walkerma ( talk)
-- Johnfos ( talk) 02:04, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
There was a temporary outage of the web tool this afternoon. The system admins disabled a key feature of the Wikipedia API that the WP 1.0 system uses, because of performance problems of unknown origin. This feature loaded information from Wikipedia to format the table cells with appropriate colors and links.
I hacked the tool to not load this data, so the table cells are now very plain. I plan to restore the old functionality in the web tool when the issue with the API is sorted. Until then, the limited functionality is the best that can be done on short notice.
This issue may cause other odd displays. For example, the main page http://toolserver.org/~enwp10 will not display properly. But the article lists and manual selection tools should work again. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 02:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
- PKM ( talk) 02:23, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I think that vast areas of Nevada culture have been left out. How can we not have included the Welcome to Las Vegas sign in past releases or the loneliest highway in the US? Here is a random list of some articles that cover some of the missing topics.
Im from WikiProject Bhutan and here is what i think should change for our articles
Remove
Add
Thats what i think should change Spongie555 ( talk) 03:50, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Remove:
Add:
If you have any questions, please feel free to leave a note at WT:NASCAR. Thanks. ~ Nerdy Science Dude 13:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
User:AllyD had identified some rather puzzling inclusions in the WP:JAZZ list (e.g. Bhumibol Adulyadej), and/or questioned their importance ratings ( Etta James, Jill Scott). I think part of this may have had to do with the rating from one project getting grandfathered into another. I'm not sure who can go through the entire list, or when. Is there a plan to generate the list again, or do you prefer that the Project provide you with a revised list? -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:57, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
As the main contributor to the squash project, I Arteyu would like to propose some important squash articles to be part of Version 0.8. The articles are as per listed below:
Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 19:05, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
You have several nominees whose significance to photography is minimal or zero, but who I suppose are worthwhile in other ways.
You also list this version of Manuel Rivera-Ortiz. This has several long and rather adulatory quotations about him, all unsourced. Its list of exhibitions is also completely unsourced. Rivera-Ortiz appears to be doing very worthwhile work and to be a good photographer, but he's not (yet) regarded as particularly eminent. Compare the article on him with, say, that on Chris Steele-Perkins, who's in Magnum Photos and whose article is fastidiously sourced and not adulatory. (However, the latter article is unillustrated, boring, and my own.) -- Hoary ( talk) 00:37, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I warmly recommend Ueno Hikoma, and specifically this version of it. This is a fine, scrupulously sourced and well illustrated article about a photographer of great importance in Japan. (And no, it's not mine.) -- Hoary ( talk) 00:58, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I might add Parshva. John Carter ( talk) 15:32, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I think it's truly silly to include
Courtney Love among the Buddhism articles (listed
HERE). The article about her doesn't even mention Buddhism except to put her in a red-linked category for "Buddhist Women". The article about her until recently didn't even mention Buddhism. Now essentially it only mentions that she feels Buddhism saved her. There are dozens of troubled pop stars, and the fact that one may turn to one religion while another may turn to another religion for help doesn't shed much light about the religions themselves. Including this article risks giving the wrong impression that Wikipedia is lightweight.
Health Researcher (
talk)
16:36, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
You might also want to include:
-- DavidCane ( talk) 01:00, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
First, thanks for all the work you do. As a member of the WikiProject Chess, I suggest you should add the following articles, based on their quality (all are GA or higher):
I also suggest you may consider removing the followings, based on their low quality:
SyG ( talk) 15:02, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Your list for inclusion on the USB key includes a "pro life" article but not the Pro-choice article. I would argue for including both the pro and con arguments of this issue. Either that or omit both. The pro choice article does not, as of this date, have any cleanup tags; so, I see no reason it could not be included.
I question the inclusion of Madonna's "Papa Don't Preach" article, as it is nothing but propaganda for the "keep your baby" argument. It should be balanced by depictions of negative outcomes of teenage pregnancy, i. e. girls whose parents kicked them out of the house, beat them or worse, who had to drop out of school and ended up on welfare. This was a courageous song in its day, but teenage pregnancy is much more acceptable in modern society than it was in 1985. Ermadog ( talk) 23:34, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
If any other article is to be included for the above group, I would think it would probably best be Ayya Vaikundar, and with a number of practicioners between .7 and 8 million I think maybe it deserves inclusion. Unfortunately, I don't really know the subject in general all that well. John Carter ( talk) 18:14, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Worcester has been cleaned up [5]. However it still has dead links and citations needed, back to January. Rich Farmbrough, 06:29, 27 September 2010 (UTC).
Can you please use this version of Juan Martin del Potro as the version you have chosen has incorrect doubles ranking. This version now has additional pictures and announcement of his return. Thanks KnowIG ( talk) 09:32, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
The bot's notice gave a link
which doesn't work. I hope we were the only one, but could someone please fix it at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ancient Egypt. Thanks
Dougweller (
talk)
13:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Seems the selections are weak on history. Why not the 1967 Detroit riot, Flint Sit-Down Strike, Siege of Detroit, Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan for examples? User:Rmhermen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.41.110.200 ( talk) 14:38, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I suggest that the following articles be added to your project:
And that the following articles be removed because they seem quite random and not important enough:
— Cheers, JackLee – talk– 15:07, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Seems very weak. Rich Farmbrough, 17:29, 27 September 2010 (UTC).
The selected version of [ cervical cancer] had some vandalism in it and some major factual errors. Suggest you update to either [ this version], which remains close to the originally selected version, but fixes the major errors; or you could use the version that is [ current at the moment] which has some more polishing (more references, updated vaccine section, etc.) Thank you. Zodon ( talk) 05:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
As a member of project Gastropods, I'd like to suggest the following changes in the list:
Remove:
Add:
These would be my suggestions. Best regards, Daniel Cavallari ( talk) 11:52, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Optimally there should be added all top importance species from
Portal:Gastropods/Topics. But some of them have not enough article quality, so some are crossed out.
TOP invasive land gastropods:
|
TOP invasive freshwater gastropods:
|
TOP invasive marine gastropods: | TOP human medical importance gastropods: |
-- Snek01 ( talk) 15:14, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
OK, I checked all of these. The only one that comes even close to the external interest score we need is the periwinkle one; the achatina fulica might also be considered, so I'm going to add those two. The others would have to be considered much too specialised. There are a couple that we could include if they were FAs, but articles that get less than fifty page views a day are normally considered outside the scope of this release, which can only include the top 1-2% of the entire Wikipedia. Thanks for the feedback, Walkerma ( talk) 01:43, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Add:
I'll leave this list open so other members of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom can add to it. Thanks Zangar ( talk) 16:14, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
List of articles to add
Could you look over your importance assessments? Some of them seem a bit off to me - admittedly, I'm not too familiar with the subject area. Thanks for your suggestions, Walkerma ( talk) 08:23, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
The articles and their revisionIDs you have chosen are perfect. We suggest you may consider adding the following articles (all are C-class):
Result | Article – Note – RevisionID | Importance | Quality | Article Alert(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 |
Paul Simonon
|
Top | C | BLP article lacking reliable references from March 2009. |
2 |
Topper Headon
|
Top | C | — |
3 |
London Calling (song)
|
Top | C | It may contain original research and needs cleanup. A couple of sections need to be turned into prose. |
4 |
Rock the Casbah
|
Top | C | — |
5 |
Should I Stay or Should I Go
|
Top | C | — |
6 |
Mikey Dread
|
High | C | — |
7 |
Give 'Em Enough Rope
|
High | C | — |
8 |
The Guns of Brixton
|
High | C | — |
9 |
The Magnificent Seven (song)
|
High | C | — |
10 |
Train in Vain
|
High | C | — |
11 |
Bernard Rhodes
|
High | C | Article lacking reliable references, needing cleanup, and that may contain original research from February 2008 |
12 |
Rock Against Racism
|
Mid | C | Article with unsourced statements from December 2007 and April 2008 |
Thanks! – pjoef ( talk • contribs) 11:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
The Jehovah's Witnesses article undergoes frequent editing, reflecting the tensions between editors who who have varying levels of involvement in, and emotional attachment to, the religion. It has stablized for the moment and I suggest this version [6] is a good deal better than the one currently listed for inclusion in Version 0.8. Other related articles that may be worthwhile for inclusion are Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs and Jehovah's Witnesses practices. -- BlackCab ( talk) 22:13, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Please consider including following articles:
thanks -- Elekhh ( talk) 01:45, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Please consider including following articles:
thanks -- Elekhh ( talk) 02:32, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Please Consider Adding:
Consider Deleting:
Gx872op ( talk) 16:24, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Please use a very recent version of the culture article that does not contain this vandalism from September 2008 that I've just discovered and removed. Graham 87 12:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
James I of Scotland oldID = 381510476 This article was snapshot in a early stage of its history. It is now as complete as I can get it. Would someone care to re-examine and perhaps use the final version? -- Bill Reid | ( talk) 09:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Sorry if its a double post, I'm not sure if anyone from the wikiproject posted these yet. DragonZero ( talk · contribs) 23:27, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Some of the selected articles now have newer improved revisions
Ploversegg ( talk) 23:31, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
It looks like a tough job sorting all these out. Your efforts are appreciated. I do think that Liberty Bell (number 15 above) was overlooked, perhaps because it became FA only on August 31, 2010. It gets about 1,000 hits per day and has 22 different language versions. Hope this helps. Smallbones ( talk) 22:00, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I see that you have included Blessed Mother Teresa in your selection, but she is not yet a saint, and should be removed from the list. - S Masters ( talk) 06:08, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
I realize this is a bit late, but here is a list of Changes to content and revision IDs for articles under the WikiProject's scope.
Change of Revision IDs
Please consider adding
Please consider removing
Thank you from WikiProject Virginia -- Fiftytwo thirty ( talk) 03:18, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
The revision of School bus that you chose includes a section that is very poorly written, messy, and completely unreferenced. It was substantially improved in a later revision. I would strongly recommend that you use this revision instead. Thank you. –A frequent contributor to that article, BMRR ( talk) 16:47, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Add:
Remove:
Constantine ✍ 19:01, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I second all of Constantine's suggestions. I would also make the following suggestions:
Add:
Remove:
More suggestions to come. As a general remark, I think any Mid importance (and above) articles rated GA and above should be automatically included Athenean ( talk) 18:12, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Though I can only speak for the lemur side of things, and not to toot my own horn, but there are a couple high-quality articles that could be added to the list: Subfossil lemur and Silky Sifaka. In the case of the former, these "giant lemurs" are a fascinating topic that really draws people in when they learn about them. (It is also linked to from the Lemur article.) As for the latter, with the recent upswing in illegal logging in Madagascar, the Silky Sifaka is one species that is frequently mentioned when these environmental problems are discussed in the news. But that's just my opinion. Sorry the other primate articles aren't in better shape. If only I could ditch my job and work on Wiki article full-time. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:40, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I would also like to note that new images from Madagascar have been added to the Ring-tailed Lemur article to replace image from captivity. Also, a section of text was too technical for the average reader, and it has now been adjusted. Therefore if it's not too late, the latest revision, oldid=398080997 should probably be used. – VisionHolder « talk » 17:09, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
You are kidding, right? You selected articles that are unfit for mainspace to include in Wikipedia 0.8? Does anyone even review these things? Gigs ( talk) 22:12, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to see
Lion,
Tiger,
Squirrel,
Mouse,
Dog,
Cat,
Gray wolf,
Porcupine,
Least Weasel,
Stoat,
Skunk,
Leopard,
Koala,
Monkey,
Hominidae,
Ape,
Orangutan,
Gorilla,
Chimpanzee,
Elephant seal,
Guinea pig,
Hamster,
Gerbil, and
Thermoregulation included.
Camelid doesn't seem important enough to be included.
European Beaver ought to be
Beaver instead.
Bob the Wikipedian (
talk •
contribs)
02:28, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
In addition to the existing articles that fall under WP Albania already included ( [8]), please consider adding the following articles that recently made it to GA:
You might also want to consider Berat County
Thank you! -- Sulmuesi ( talk) 00:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, there are many articles in WikiProject Human spaceflight that have been tagged for inclusion in version 0.8 which probably shouldn't be included. This includes many Start-class articles. At first I thought reducing the importance ratings would fix this, but it didn't. For example, Soyuz TM-3 is start class, has an importance rating no higher than mid on all WikiProjects, and it averages 15 views a day. Yet it's tagged for inclusion? I see two possible explanations: 1) It's a member of 6 different wikiprojects, and 2) It's included in a few templates and is therefore linked to by 188 other articles. As I understand it, the wikiproject banners and wikilinks have (artificially?) raised the importance of these articles to being included. But maybe I've misunderstood? Mlm42 ( talk) 00:33, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest the following articles be added to Iowa's articles:
Normally I would suggest that Ansel Briggs be added as first governor of Iowa, but his article is pretty much a content-free stub.
-- Philosopher Let us reason together. 15:46, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
(NOTE: I don't speak for WikiProject Video Games, and don't know if they plan to make any suggestions.)
The video games list presently includes the RuneScape article.
Can I ask that this revision be used? It has been restructured, has no dead links or {{ citation needed}} tags, and has less cruft content. Thank you. 1ForTheMoney ( talk) 19:47, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
In your choice of Korea-related as well as Rail transport articles and revisionIDs, you have chosen a version from August 31. However, the high-speed system that is the subject of the article has been expanded on November 1, 2010; and the article was put through a major overhaul for the occasion (mostly by me), affecting all of the text, the maps, and diagrams. Work is still in progress on some minor details, but if you need a link to a specific version, the current version should be good enough. -- Rontombontom ( talk) 12:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Update: another Rail transport article, Taiwan High Speed Rail, is in your selection with an August 29 revisionID. But this article was expanded, updated and thoroughly re-written, too (mostly by me), including the correction of some major (and unsourced) technical and historical mistakes. Again I recommend the use of the most current version. -- Rontombontom ( talk) 10:13, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
I started working on this pretty much when 0.8 selection was announced. However it was decided I had more important things to do with my time than improving articles so what would have taken me a day or two is still unfinished, and now needs to be handed over to someone else. Bearing in mind that this does not spot all typos, by any means, it is still a substantial list (I think I fixed about 1000).
I recommend skipping most RegexTypo hyphenation/dehyphenation changes as they seem EngVar (two-fold, right-handed, grand-daughter, step-sister). Also tv=>TV needs care and should often be "television", sometimes tv.
Regards,
Rich
Farmbrough,
01:52, 19 November 2010 (UTC).
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
FEEDBACK HERE IS NOW CLOSED FOR VERSION 0.8. Thank you for giving us a lot of useful comments! If you missed the deadline, please contact us on the main
Version 1.0 Team talk page.
Please leave feedback here regarding the Version 0.8 offline selection. If you are representing the views of a WikiProject, please mention that, and add a link back to the relevant discussion.
We will review all comments here and usually follow the advice of the WikiProjects. Occasionally, of course, there may be conflicting views, in which case members of the 1.0 team will use their judgement. Walkerma ( talk) 03:09, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
I'll start out by state that I am not a representative of WP: Aviation, and thus my feedback is not of the project's overall generation but of my own personal views. I noticed an announcement by your selection bot asking for feedback, and after reviewing the list of aircraft, there are a few choice items that you may wish to add to the 0.8 Version within this subject. I believe it would be expressly important to include aircraft of a famed and unique nature: the already selected Concorde being the most obvious example that comes to mind. Two articles show promise in my opinion, the British Aerospace Sea Harrier (The famed 'Harrier jump-jet' in its most well known form, one of very few mainstream V/STOL jets and the most successful) and the Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey (the first mainstream tilt-rotor aircraft, crossing the line between helicopter and plane). Including these unique aircraft could help broaden the horizon of possibilities for those with an interest in the field yet with limited resources available, they're both articles of a high quality and are of GA class as of current revisions. In my opinion, they're worthy inclusions. Kyteto ( talk) 13:54, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
For consideration:- BOAC Flight 712 (GA) and Jane Harrison (GC) (Start). The accident led to the only George Cross directly awarded to a woman in peacetime. Mjroots ( talk) 10:15, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music will post revision IDs we want to replace the selected versions here as we come upon them:
- WesleyDodds ( talk) 13:08, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
I had tagged this article Immaculate Conception for clean up and citation but an editor has removed the tags without any substantial improvement. The content is factored with WP:OR and needs quite a bit of clean up. Malke 2010 ( talk) 23:03, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
I can leave a message on the WikiProject Catholicism. I'm a member of that Project. How do I go back and look through all the versions? Also, just because History2007 has been obsessively editing there doesn't mean he's been doing a good job. He's a belligerent editor who drives other editors away. I can show you diffs from several pages, all with the same uncivil, straw man arguments. Please tell me how I can go through all the history. Thanks. Malke 2010 ( talk) 05:25, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Must be that time of year - another release to keep us on our toes, here's a couple of updated id's - by the way is there any particularly useful format you would like these in? Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 23:16, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Genetic testing oldid=385440044 (current version - removes test edit)
In my view, articles that have scored too high are:
Missing KEY articles about Christianity: (Comments and corrections to status added in parentheses by Walkerma)
As well as may, many others. I think many of the articles about "specific individuals", specially almost living ones, should take a backseat to doctrinal issues like the Trinity. Overall, I think the ratings are random at best and the addition of Christian metal over doctrinal articles reflects that. History2007 ( talk) 23:17, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
[1]. It's very well written and with reliable sources. I'd shorten the lead a bit, deleting out the mission bit, but otherwise the article reads very well. It could stand a few more pictures which I could recommend. If you want to include Immaculate Conception I'm working on a complete rewrite with another editor. Thanks.20:28, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Add:
Remove:
Review comments: Many of these are ranked quite low, but seem to reflect a consensus from the WikiProject; I appreciate the aim of getting a more worldwide viewpoint.
Having reviewed the list of articles provided here for Wikipedia:WikiProject Riverina, can I highly recommend adding the article on Wagga Wagga. It is the largest city in the Riverina region, larger than both Albury, New South Wales and Griffith, New South Wales which have been included. It is also at "GA-class" standard, whereas Griffith and Albury are only "B-class" articles. Wagga Wagga is more historically significant than Albury and Griffith and clearly more economically significant than Griffith.
Other than Wagga Wagga, I don't see any standout omissions. I consider that the list is a reasonable selection and all are worthy of inclusion. However, if one article must be removed from the list to see Wagga Wagga included, I would recommend removing Griffith, New South Wales. Please let me know if you require further information. -- Mattinbgn ( talk) 00:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I am not sure if I agree with the list at the article list. First the choice of Horatio Hornblower. Though he may be more popular as a page, Patrick O'Brian's Aubrey-Maturin series is largely considered to be a better representation of a historical novel by naval historians and literary critics, when they become familiar with him, immediately place much greater praise on those books. Also, I think the quality of the Aubrey-Maturin series article is much better quality than the Horatio Hornblower article, with far less lists of trivia and more important Real World information with scholarly background.
Also, A Farewell to Arms is not in very good shape. That article needs some serious overhaul and definitely should be co. Catch-22, Slaughterhouse-Five and Gone with the Wind have some serious OR issues, even though, from a quick glance, they seem to be well within standard literary practice for original research.
Ones that I think should be released:
Article that probably needs some work before release:
Articles that definitely shouldn't be released in the state they are in now:
Sadads ( talk) 00:14, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
These good and featured articles should be added:
-- ErgoSum• talk• trib 00:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
These good articles should be added:
-- ErgoSum• talk• trib 00:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I request you use this version of Greenwich Mean Time because one of two contradictory claims is removed in the later version, and the other claim is softened. In short, the Interpretation Act 1978 that determines the legal meaning of certain words in the UK states that "whenever an expression of time occurs in an Act, the time referred to shall, unless it is otherwise specifically stated, be held to be Greenwich mean time." No one knows if this is the same as Coordinated Universal Time. If leap seconds are eliminated, as is currently proposed, the difference between UTC and the actual mean time at Greenwich will gradually become more and more noticeable to the "man on the street". Considering the controversy surrounding the leap second proposal, the article should not make any statement either way about what GMT means.
The claim that has been softened is "It is arguably the same as Coordinated Universal Time (UTC)" with the change from the proposed V 0.8 version underlined. Also, a claim that Greenwich mean time is the legal time in the UK has been deleted. This is appropriate in case the UK authorities eventually decide that UTC is what was really meant in the Interpretation Act.
To confirm there is indeed uncertainty, see the paper "The Debate over UTC and Leap Seconds" by David Finkleman, John H. Seago & P. Kenneth Seidelmann, presented at AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, 2 - 5 August 2010, Toronto, Ontario Canada. The paper states in section F2 "In other countries where UTC is the explicit legal basis, there may be political obstacles or questions about changing UTC. The very title 'Coordinated Universal Time' expresses the requirement to track Earth rotation: nations adopting UTC broadcasts as their statutory or regulatory standard understood UTC to be a realization of Universal Time in title and purpose upon official adoption, and the obligation to keep pace with Earth rotation has never been repealed." Jc3s5h ( talk) 00:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Better version of Philippines article is the more recent Revision 385376960 by ElockidAlternate 16:01, 17 September 2010 – Removes dubiously related original research. Should replace Revision 383673037 by Chipmunkdavis 17:01, 8 September 2010. — Lambanog ( talk) 01:18, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi all - first a quick thank you for doing this task, and a comment that overall the NZ list looks a good one. There are a couplke of articles which seem to be glaring ommissions, though:
I also think it's a little odd that three of the country's regions have listed articles (Waikato, Manawatu-Wanganui, and West Coast), whereas none of the others do. This may be a problem with the assessment by WPNZ, however - to my untrained eye the articles on Canterbury Region and Otago Region (both classed as "Start") look better than the one on West Coast Region (classed as "B").
I realise everyoine from every WikiProject's going to have suggestions on what could and could not go into v0.8, but I'd suggest trimming out the three Regions and just keeping the Regions of New Zealand article, and adding in the three others I named. Grutness... wha? 01:25, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Include:
Exclude:
Adabow ( talk · contribs) 00:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I've responded on the v0.8 talk page, but I'll bite here, too.
I'd also be tempted to add New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act 1987 (surprisingly, only 518 pts). Other than that, I agree pretty much with Avenue's and Adabow's comments above. Grutness... wha? 04:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
One thing uniquely Kiwi are Māori electorates. That article isn't very comprehensive, though. I've recently written First Māori elections, which goes a lot more into the historical context of that issue. It's quite new and I don't know where the score that the toolserver lists show comes from. Both have a relatively low score of 225, so are way below the cut off for articles that have been chosen (>1050). Ok, I'm probably biased, but one of those articles should be added. Schwede 66 06:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Suggest you add:
White there are some quality problems with some of the other articles, I think they are a good list in terms of importance. hamiltonstone ( talk) 01:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I notice that all of these articles - other than your art article - are very weak on references. The Bonner article could be included if it were a much stronger article, but its scoring on other parameters is also low. Namatjira does rather better, so I think we can include that as well as the art article. Freeman was autoselected. Many thanks, Walkerma ( talk) 04:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
I reviewed this list. I would suggest deleting Charles Mackerras, which is not a very good article and also not an important article to our project. Instead, I would add D'Oyly Carte Opera Company, Trial by Jury and The Pirates of Penzance. You might also want to include George Grossmith. Looking at other projects, I see that you are pretty much including all the FA and GA articles. You might want to include all of our FA and GA articles? Best regards, -- Ssilvers ( talk) 01:41, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I've browsed over the titles (haven't looked at the articles to check their quality), but seeing as how my choice use for the software would be to allow children to browse with the comfort that they are not online, I'd expect to find both an array of well-known fishes as well as a couple lesser-known amazing ones.
Angelfish - Extremely well-known.
Bass - Anyone who goes fishing would appreciate this one.
Chinese algae eater - Popular in aquariums, this is a weird fish that sticks to the side of a tank with its mouth, keeping the rocks and glass clean.
Clownfish - Very well-known fish, a favorite among kids. I'm surprised it's not on the list.
Manta Ray - Gigantic thing that hardly looks like a fish, and it can jump out of the water to look around. Kids love this one, too.
Oarfish - The longest fish there is, and it's pretty spiffy-looking, too.
Psychedelic Frogfish - Not particularly well-known, but a very notable fish for being so weird. Kids would love reading about a fish that can inflate and deflate its face, swim like a bouncing beachball or by using jet propulsion, blend in with pinstripe pajama camouflage, and crawl into tiny holes with its armlike fins.
Sawfish - Seriously, what kid doesn't love a shark with a gigantic serrated blade on its snout?
Since Northern Pike is already included, I'm not sure Esox is necessary, but that's just me.
And, that's my two cents. Bob the Wikipedian ( talk • contribs) 01:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The musicals project doesn't cover musical films, so any of those are incorrectly tagged. Why are you including C-class and start-class articles? I wouldn't include those? -- Ssilvers ( talk) 01:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Walkerma ( talk) 03:02, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
I think you should use a new version of the Gaborone page. The information on the old revision is outdated, and the newer one has a lot more references and correct information. ethansmith | talk to me. 01:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Suggest you use this version, in which I have reverted some vandalism. hamiltonstone ( talk) 02:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Every article in Baseball Category, the 50 we selected should be on the list. Along with our FAs and GAs. Secret account 02:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
A newer version of the Kevin Rudd article should be used, since if I am reading the list correctly, the selected version of that article shows that he is still Prime Minister of Australia, which is emphatically not the case now. Perhaps a newer version of Julia Gillard should be added as well, since her situation has changed dramatically since she became the Prime Minister on 24 June. Graham 87 03:17, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I propose List of dinosaurs be removed from the selection as it claims to be a complete list but is rather controversial and never completely up-to-date.
In its place, I nominate Gideon Mantell, the first paleontologist to work with dinosaurs (with the exception of his wife, who, unfortunately, has no article at all on Wikipedia?!?). Bob the Wikipedian ( talk • contribs) 03:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
May I suggest a few individual mill articles for consideration for inclusion?
Thanks for your time. Mjroots ( talk) 04:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
There seems to be a total lack of modern textile mills (post 1850) {{ Lancashire Cotton}} {{ Lancashire Cotton Corporation}} refer. As the driving force of the industrial revolution- and the economic development of nineteenth and twentieth century: this omission seems strange.
-- ClemRutter ( talk) 08:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
For the most part I think the selection chosen is fine (though sadly many of these crucially important articles are pretty shoddy), but I have a few comments on the list:
Cheers, jacobolus (t) 04:36, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest using the following versions of Red, Yellow, Green, and Blue since we in the Color Project just added greatly expanded definitions of these colors in the four major color systems--RGB, CMYK, NCS, and Munsell, so they contain a lot more information about the colors:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Red&oldid=392739331
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Yellow&oldid=392738567
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Green&oldid=392737716
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Blue&oldid=392736709
I would suggest using the following version of Purple because it now includes the Munsell color purple which is important to include because Munsell is one of the major color systems:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Purple&oldid=392702297
I think that Cyan and Magenta should DEFINITELY be included because it is important to include all of the three primary colors used in printing--yellow, cyan and magenta.
I also think that web colors and the list of colors, as well as Gold (color) should DEFINITELY be included. A lot of people use the web colors and everyone has a strong interest in the list of colors. The list of colors article gets an average of about 7,500 views per day, which is a large amount for a Wikipedia article.
http://stats.grok.se/en/201010/List_of_colors
The article on the color gold has a lot of interesting information about the color gold in the "gold in human culture" section.
Jacobolus writes most of the content of the articles on color theory and since 2006 I have written most of the content of the articles on the colors themselves. It is mostly us two who edit and add most of the content to the color articles. Another person named Pale Aqua creates the templates that are used to display the colors; she is a highly skilled computer programmer from England. Another person named VMS Mosaic does a lot of work patrolling the articles against vandalism. A person named Dicklyon checks for scientific accuracy. So it is mostly just we five people in the Color Project.
Anyway, I hope you will go with my suggestions.
Best wishes, Keraunos ( talk) 07:20, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
That's all, I think. Thanks _dk ( talk) 06:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Re the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poetry recommendations, I think these articles are in too rough a state to submit - they haven't been seriously edited or had substantive content added edited for years.
I would suggest instead:
Most of the class assessments are very out of date. This is just an individual take, I'm not speaking on behalf of anyone else. Thanks Spanglej ( talk) 07:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Further nominating, in their version as of 07:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC):
And an info: Walvis Bay and Lüderitz have been downgraded to "High". -- Pgallert ( talk) 07:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Work in progress, have done some streamlining in introduction and will do more work on risk factors/epidemiology RSN. Will let you know about progress. Richiez ( talk) 08:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
For the most part, the selection chosen seems to be fine. However, I would take a more recent revision of the main Avatar: The Last Airbender article, as some of the content has significantly changed since the revision currently selected for Version 0.8. — Parent5446 ☯ ( msg email) 08:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Selected version has a little formatting issue in "FDA approved indications" section, possibly more. Richiez ( talk) 08:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Article assessment for WikiProject South Africa is still very poor, but I believe the following articles could be considered for inclusion in Release version 0.8
-- NJR_ZA ( talk) 09:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The articles chosen seem to be biased towards military ships. We need some merchant ships, the glamorous and the not-so-glamorous. Therefore I submit for consideration
These should address the balance a bit. Mjroots ( talk) 10:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Houston Stewart Chamberlain seems significantly overscored. The article is of very low importance as regards Richard Wagner, and of virtually nil importance as regards Opera (of which WP Wagner is an offshoot) or music. He is a pretty obscure figure (regardless of one's views of his opnions) and certainly doesn't deserve to be in Wikipedia 0.8!! -- Smerus ( talk) 12:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
On a separate manner, I note that three of the four Ring operas are included. This makes the selection look very haphazard. Siegfried (opera) should be handled in the same way as Das Rheingold, Die Walküre and Götterdämmerung - all in, or all out. If they are to be included, then they need a quick going over. All four rely entirely on the two composition of the Ring articles for details of the individual works' composition. I'll have a quick hack at them to include some info and then let you know which version to use.-- Peter cohen ( talk) 21:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
On the other hand, Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg has improved since it was last assessed. I have now upgraded it to a B and it should be included in the build.-- Peter cohen ( talk) 19:26, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
The project also supports the inclusion of Cosima Wagner, the BP of Wagner's second wife who presided over the Bayreuth Festival for many years after his death.-- Peter cohen ( talk) 19:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
All the above reflects conversations at the project talk page Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Richard Wagner#Richard Wagner articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release-- Peter cohen ( talk) 00:55, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
OK thanks, this is very helpful! I would have expected us to be including all four parts of the ring cycle (the bot doesn't know they are linked!), but it seems as if we'll have to wait for the next release for you to knock those into shape. At least we have Der Ring des Nibelungen. I agree with your suggestions of Cosima Wagner and Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg, these look to be an excellent choice. Regarding Houston Stewart Chamberlain, I think I'll leave him in; it's hard to remove an article that is of interest to several diverse WikiProjects, because one may say "that doesn't matter" while another may disagree strongly (though it's true that no one rates it as very important). Also, the stats are very clear and consistent, with a steady 4-5000 people a month reading the article even going back to 2008. There are articles on him in Latvian, Bulgarian, Farsi, Japanese and many more, suggesting a worldwide importance. So I think I'm going to play safe and leave that one in. Many thanks for your great feedback. Walkerma ( talk) 04:14, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
I can suggest:
Macdonald-ross ( talk) 12:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
As our project determines any updated article revisions that should be included for release, they will be posted here:
Many thanks! Walkerma ( talk) 04:32, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Most of the articles I'm not that familiar with (not being core Venezuela topics), but
So, suggestions for inclusion:
Rd232 talk 16:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello, a bot recently asked our project to review articles for inclusion in the next release of wikipedia. There are three omissions from our project that I feel should be included. Most importantly, the article Indiana should be included (thats kind of a no brainer). Secondly History of Indiana, Indiana General Assembly, and Battle of Corydon deserve inclusion over some of the other picks. At minimum Indiana is a must have topic. Thanks — Charles Edward ( Talk | Contribs) 17:00, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I have reviewed all the articles in question. Many articles listed are not of particularly important value or quality.
The following articles may be removed from the list, unless they are they for another project:
These article I think are not of sufficient quality to merit inclusion, in addition to some not being notable enough. Please remove them from the list as well
There are a few articles not included in the list should be, some are pretty obvious
— Charles Edward ( Talk | Contribs) 14:47, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks for taking the time. Walkerma ( talk) 03:20, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Somerset#Somerset articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release. I clicked on the link for project articles requiring cleanup, however this didn't seem to have anything related to Somerset. Is this a bug in the process or am I doing something wrong?— Rod talk 17:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I was interested to read the selections for Greater Manchester articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release and while I appreciate it is done to a formula, consider it to be unduly weighted toward football articles, particularly related to Manchester United. I like football but think, considering the scope of FA and GA articles written by WikiProject Greater Manchester participants and other editors, the selection is flawed. In fact I would replace any C class article in the list with any GA or Fa article from the project.
Perhaps you might initially consider these:
River Mersey could be replaced by River Irwell reason, better quality article which is more relevant to several boroughs in Greater Manchester. Manchester United F.C. Reserves and Academy could be replaced with Belle Vue Zoological Gardens reason too many Manchester United articles, this one is short and mostly lists. Phil Neville could be swapped for Scout Moor Wind Farm, a FA quality article. Gary Neville could be replaced by Manchester Ship Canal or Trafford Park.
I appreciate the football lobby won't agree, but really Greater Manchester is a much bigger topic. This is my view, not the project view.-- J3Mrs ( talk) 18:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Considerable work has been done on Denton, Texas since the October 2009 version that was selected.
Please use this revision (385032628) for Denton, Texas in the WikiProject Dallas and WikiProject Texas groups. -- Mahanga ( Talk) 21:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Please include the article Spider anatomy (which is a sub-article of Spider) in Wikipedia Version 0.8. Otherwise your selections are fine. Ryan Kaldari ( talk) 22:05, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Like
last time, it would probably be better to use
furry convention and/or
fursuit rather than
anthropomorphism, which is well-linked, but still not a very good article.
Furry fandom (which was also selected) contains sufficient information to understand anthropomorphism in the context of the fandom.
GreenReaper (
talk)
22:07, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I would like to suggest Bristol Old Vic and Bristol Bus Boycott, 1963 as worthy candidates. Jezhotwells ( talk) 23:00, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I have taken a look at this list an noticed some article which assessment didn't add up:
Their assessment wasn't right and I think they should not be in the listing
Articles missing in the listing are:
Good luck -- Mdd ( talk) 23:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The following articles are not of sufficient interest to WP:WPO to be included in Version 0.8: Andrea Bocelli, Her Majesty's Theatre, Jay Pritzker Pavilion and Falsetto. In addition, Die Walküre has been erroneously tagged with the WPO banner as well as the banner of our Richard Wagner sub-project. We are currently discussing suitable replacements for these and other fringe articles listed in our table. -- Guillaume Tell 23:56, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I am surprised Prem Rawat articles are being considered for inclusion on V. 0.8. Although Prem Rawat was notable as a young guru in the 70s and early 80s, for many years now, in spite of tremendous efforts by his remaining supporters, he has not been included in any reliable sources. Activity on the articles is very quiet except when current supporters try to edit the articles to present their guru in a better light.-- John Brauns ( talk) 10:51, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I cannot for the life of me figure out why the Prem Rawat series of articles has been selected for inclusion on V. 0.8. For years now, the editing of the Prem Rawat articles has been one of the most contentious in the Biography of Living Persons category and these articles are not good examples of cooperative, accurate, informational Wikipedia writing. The only reason the articles were placed in the WikiProject section was because pro-Rawat editors have been unable and unwilling to cooperate with uninvolved editors through two lengthy ARBCOMs, and many attempts at mediation that were fruitless. Moreover, there are plenty of other biographies that would serve to educate the general public other than information about a New Religious Movement/cult leader. I'm interested in knowing what criteria has been used to make this dubious choice and an explanation would be most appreciated. Sylviecyn ( talk) 17:43, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, you may want to consider Maya stelae for the release, it's a new article but already fairly complete and of high importance within WikiProject Mesoamerica. Best regards, Simon Burchell ( talk) 12:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi, i'm representing WikiProject Darts and have a suggestion regarding our project.
Thanks. Mr.Kennedy1 talk guestbook 15:15, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I cannot get the "list of articles" to show up on any of my computers (maybe the toolserver is over-loaded at the moment)? Could someone on the v0.8 team check to ensure that the Criticism of religion article is in the list? I think it is "B" rated and High priority. It is also within the Religion project, and is highly rated there, also. -- Noleander ( talk) 16:35, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I tried to use the tool server, and I don't see any articles listed yet from this project. It is still in work? -- Noleander ( talk) 16:38, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I think the articles on Transcendental Meditation movement and Transcendental Meditation technique are probably the two most important articles not included in the release version, although I don't know the subject so well as to say whether they are more important, as separate articles, than other topics also not included. John Carter ( talk) 19:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Clicking on the link to give the list of articles produces no list. The link gives a toolkit with no information whether the Glifing project has to generate its own list or whether no article merits inclusion. Since Gliding is a featured article, the second interpretation seems unlikely. Puzzled. JMcC ( talk) 21:34, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure how this is done but I was once embarrassed by a typo in a article I was "watching" and discovered that just before it hit "featured article" someone had changed a BC date to an AD date which was mortifying to insiders.
At some close delta to "publish" the article(s) should be fully protected with only a single editor/admin able to make changes. Edit "suggestions" which s/he should take lightly, can be made on the discussion page. No reason it can't go out with "simple" errors. They all do. But the gross ones (vandalism sometimes) can be eliminated in this fashion. If you haven't made plans to do this already. Student7 ( talk) 22:50, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I think this Wikipedia 0.8 offline release is a great idea, but it would seem that most of the WP:Energy recognised content is not being included. For example, apparently only 12 of our 45 GAs are to be included, see [3]. I therefore propose that an additional 12 energy GAs be added to the 0.8 release, all with a selection score above 740: My comments are added after the article names, with my general response below the list. Walkerma ( talk)
-- Johnfos ( talk) 02:04, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
There was a temporary outage of the web tool this afternoon. The system admins disabled a key feature of the Wikipedia API that the WP 1.0 system uses, because of performance problems of unknown origin. This feature loaded information from Wikipedia to format the table cells with appropriate colors and links.
I hacked the tool to not load this data, so the table cells are now very plain. I plan to restore the old functionality in the web tool when the issue with the API is sorted. Until then, the limited functionality is the best that can be done on short notice.
This issue may cause other odd displays. For example, the main page http://toolserver.org/~enwp10 will not display properly. But the article lists and manual selection tools should work again. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 02:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
- PKM ( talk) 02:23, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I think that vast areas of Nevada culture have been left out. How can we not have included the Welcome to Las Vegas sign in past releases or the loneliest highway in the US? Here is a random list of some articles that cover some of the missing topics.
Im from WikiProject Bhutan and here is what i think should change for our articles
Remove
Add
Thats what i think should change Spongie555 ( talk) 03:50, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Remove:
Add:
If you have any questions, please feel free to leave a note at WT:NASCAR. Thanks. ~ Nerdy Science Dude 13:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
User:AllyD had identified some rather puzzling inclusions in the WP:JAZZ list (e.g. Bhumibol Adulyadej), and/or questioned their importance ratings ( Etta James, Jill Scott). I think part of this may have had to do with the rating from one project getting grandfathered into another. I'm not sure who can go through the entire list, or when. Is there a plan to generate the list again, or do you prefer that the Project provide you with a revised list? -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:57, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
As the main contributor to the squash project, I Arteyu would like to propose some important squash articles to be part of Version 0.8. The articles are as per listed below:
Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 19:05, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
You have several nominees whose significance to photography is minimal or zero, but who I suppose are worthwhile in other ways.
You also list this version of Manuel Rivera-Ortiz. This has several long and rather adulatory quotations about him, all unsourced. Its list of exhibitions is also completely unsourced. Rivera-Ortiz appears to be doing very worthwhile work and to be a good photographer, but he's not (yet) regarded as particularly eminent. Compare the article on him with, say, that on Chris Steele-Perkins, who's in Magnum Photos and whose article is fastidiously sourced and not adulatory. (However, the latter article is unillustrated, boring, and my own.) -- Hoary ( talk) 00:37, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I warmly recommend Ueno Hikoma, and specifically this version of it. This is a fine, scrupulously sourced and well illustrated article about a photographer of great importance in Japan. (And no, it's not mine.) -- Hoary ( talk) 00:58, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I might add Parshva. John Carter ( talk) 15:32, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
I think it's truly silly to include
Courtney Love among the Buddhism articles (listed
HERE). The article about her doesn't even mention Buddhism except to put her in a red-linked category for "Buddhist Women". The article about her until recently didn't even mention Buddhism. Now essentially it only mentions that she feels Buddhism saved her. There are dozens of troubled pop stars, and the fact that one may turn to one religion while another may turn to another religion for help doesn't shed much light about the religions themselves. Including this article risks giving the wrong impression that Wikipedia is lightweight.
Health Researcher (
talk)
16:36, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
You might also want to include:
-- DavidCane ( talk) 01:00, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
First, thanks for all the work you do. As a member of the WikiProject Chess, I suggest you should add the following articles, based on their quality (all are GA or higher):
I also suggest you may consider removing the followings, based on their low quality:
SyG ( talk) 15:02, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Your list for inclusion on the USB key includes a "pro life" article but not the Pro-choice article. I would argue for including both the pro and con arguments of this issue. Either that or omit both. The pro choice article does not, as of this date, have any cleanup tags; so, I see no reason it could not be included.
I question the inclusion of Madonna's "Papa Don't Preach" article, as it is nothing but propaganda for the "keep your baby" argument. It should be balanced by depictions of negative outcomes of teenage pregnancy, i. e. girls whose parents kicked them out of the house, beat them or worse, who had to drop out of school and ended up on welfare. This was a courageous song in its day, but teenage pregnancy is much more acceptable in modern society than it was in 1985. Ermadog ( talk) 23:34, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
If any other article is to be included for the above group, I would think it would probably best be Ayya Vaikundar, and with a number of practicioners between .7 and 8 million I think maybe it deserves inclusion. Unfortunately, I don't really know the subject in general all that well. John Carter ( talk) 18:14, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Worcester has been cleaned up [5]. However it still has dead links and citations needed, back to January. Rich Farmbrough, 06:29, 27 September 2010 (UTC).
Can you please use this version of Juan Martin del Potro as the version you have chosen has incorrect doubles ranking. This version now has additional pictures and announcement of his return. Thanks KnowIG ( talk) 09:32, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
The bot's notice gave a link
which doesn't work. I hope we were the only one, but could someone please fix it at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ancient Egypt. Thanks
Dougweller (
talk)
13:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Seems the selections are weak on history. Why not the 1967 Detroit riot, Flint Sit-Down Strike, Siege of Detroit, Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan for examples? User:Rmhermen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.41.110.200 ( talk) 14:38, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I suggest that the following articles be added to your project:
And that the following articles be removed because they seem quite random and not important enough:
— Cheers, JackLee – talk– 15:07, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Seems very weak. Rich Farmbrough, 17:29, 27 September 2010 (UTC).
The selected version of [ cervical cancer] had some vandalism in it and some major factual errors. Suggest you update to either [ this version], which remains close to the originally selected version, but fixes the major errors; or you could use the version that is [ current at the moment] which has some more polishing (more references, updated vaccine section, etc.) Thank you. Zodon ( talk) 05:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
As a member of project Gastropods, I'd like to suggest the following changes in the list:
Remove:
Add:
These would be my suggestions. Best regards, Daniel Cavallari ( talk) 11:52, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Optimally there should be added all top importance species from
Portal:Gastropods/Topics. But some of them have not enough article quality, so some are crossed out.
TOP invasive land gastropods:
|
TOP invasive freshwater gastropods:
|
TOP invasive marine gastropods: | TOP human medical importance gastropods: |
-- Snek01 ( talk) 15:14, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
OK, I checked all of these. The only one that comes even close to the external interest score we need is the periwinkle one; the achatina fulica might also be considered, so I'm going to add those two. The others would have to be considered much too specialised. There are a couple that we could include if they were FAs, but articles that get less than fifty page views a day are normally considered outside the scope of this release, which can only include the top 1-2% of the entire Wikipedia. Thanks for the feedback, Walkerma ( talk) 01:43, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Add:
I'll leave this list open so other members of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom can add to it. Thanks Zangar ( talk) 16:14, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
List of articles to add
Could you look over your importance assessments? Some of them seem a bit off to me - admittedly, I'm not too familiar with the subject area. Thanks for your suggestions, Walkerma ( talk) 08:23, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
The articles and their revisionIDs you have chosen are perfect. We suggest you may consider adding the following articles (all are C-class):
Result | Article – Note – RevisionID | Importance | Quality | Article Alert(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 |
Paul Simonon
|
Top | C | BLP article lacking reliable references from March 2009. |
2 |
Topper Headon
|
Top | C | — |
3 |
London Calling (song)
|
Top | C | It may contain original research and needs cleanup. A couple of sections need to be turned into prose. |
4 |
Rock the Casbah
|
Top | C | — |
5 |
Should I Stay or Should I Go
|
Top | C | — |
6 |
Mikey Dread
|
High | C | — |
7 |
Give 'Em Enough Rope
|
High | C | — |
8 |
The Guns of Brixton
|
High | C | — |
9 |
The Magnificent Seven (song)
|
High | C | — |
10 |
Train in Vain
|
High | C | — |
11 |
Bernard Rhodes
|
High | C | Article lacking reliable references, needing cleanup, and that may contain original research from February 2008 |
12 |
Rock Against Racism
|
Mid | C | Article with unsourced statements from December 2007 and April 2008 |
Thanks! – pjoef ( talk • contribs) 11:32, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
The Jehovah's Witnesses article undergoes frequent editing, reflecting the tensions between editors who who have varying levels of involvement in, and emotional attachment to, the religion. It has stablized for the moment and I suggest this version [6] is a good deal better than the one currently listed for inclusion in Version 0.8. Other related articles that may be worthwhile for inclusion are Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs and Jehovah's Witnesses practices. -- BlackCab ( talk) 22:13, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Please consider including following articles:
thanks -- Elekhh ( talk) 01:45, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Please consider including following articles:
thanks -- Elekhh ( talk) 02:32, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Please Consider Adding:
Consider Deleting:
Gx872op ( talk) 16:24, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Please use a very recent version of the culture article that does not contain this vandalism from September 2008 that I've just discovered and removed. Graham 87 12:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
James I of Scotland oldID = 381510476 This article was snapshot in a early stage of its history. It is now as complete as I can get it. Would someone care to re-examine and perhaps use the final version? -- Bill Reid | ( talk) 09:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Sorry if its a double post, I'm not sure if anyone from the wikiproject posted these yet. DragonZero ( talk · contribs) 23:27, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Some of the selected articles now have newer improved revisions
Ploversegg ( talk) 23:31, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
It looks like a tough job sorting all these out. Your efforts are appreciated. I do think that Liberty Bell (number 15 above) was overlooked, perhaps because it became FA only on August 31, 2010. It gets about 1,000 hits per day and has 22 different language versions. Hope this helps. Smallbones ( talk) 22:00, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I see that you have included Blessed Mother Teresa in your selection, but she is not yet a saint, and should be removed from the list. - S Masters ( talk) 06:08, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
I realize this is a bit late, but here is a list of Changes to content and revision IDs for articles under the WikiProject's scope.
Change of Revision IDs
Please consider adding
Please consider removing
Thank you from WikiProject Virginia -- Fiftytwo thirty ( talk) 03:18, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
The revision of School bus that you chose includes a section that is very poorly written, messy, and completely unreferenced. It was substantially improved in a later revision. I would strongly recommend that you use this revision instead. Thank you. –A frequent contributor to that article, BMRR ( talk) 16:47, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Add:
Remove:
Constantine ✍ 19:01, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I second all of Constantine's suggestions. I would also make the following suggestions:
Add:
Remove:
More suggestions to come. As a general remark, I think any Mid importance (and above) articles rated GA and above should be automatically included Athenean ( talk) 18:12, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Though I can only speak for the lemur side of things, and not to toot my own horn, but there are a couple high-quality articles that could be added to the list: Subfossil lemur and Silky Sifaka. In the case of the former, these "giant lemurs" are a fascinating topic that really draws people in when they learn about them. (It is also linked to from the Lemur article.) As for the latter, with the recent upswing in illegal logging in Madagascar, the Silky Sifaka is one species that is frequently mentioned when these environmental problems are discussed in the news. But that's just my opinion. Sorry the other primate articles aren't in better shape. If only I could ditch my job and work on Wiki article full-time. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:40, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I would also like to note that new images from Madagascar have been added to the Ring-tailed Lemur article to replace image from captivity. Also, a section of text was too technical for the average reader, and it has now been adjusted. Therefore if it's not too late, the latest revision, oldid=398080997 should probably be used. – VisionHolder « talk » 17:09, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
You are kidding, right? You selected articles that are unfit for mainspace to include in Wikipedia 0.8? Does anyone even review these things? Gigs ( talk) 22:12, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to see
Lion,
Tiger,
Squirrel,
Mouse,
Dog,
Cat,
Gray wolf,
Porcupine,
Least Weasel,
Stoat,
Skunk,
Leopard,
Koala,
Monkey,
Hominidae,
Ape,
Orangutan,
Gorilla,
Chimpanzee,
Elephant seal,
Guinea pig,
Hamster,
Gerbil, and
Thermoregulation included.
Camelid doesn't seem important enough to be included.
European Beaver ought to be
Beaver instead.
Bob the Wikipedian (
talk •
contribs)
02:28, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
In addition to the existing articles that fall under WP Albania already included ( [8]), please consider adding the following articles that recently made it to GA:
You might also want to consider Berat County
Thank you! -- Sulmuesi ( talk) 00:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, there are many articles in WikiProject Human spaceflight that have been tagged for inclusion in version 0.8 which probably shouldn't be included. This includes many Start-class articles. At first I thought reducing the importance ratings would fix this, but it didn't. For example, Soyuz TM-3 is start class, has an importance rating no higher than mid on all WikiProjects, and it averages 15 views a day. Yet it's tagged for inclusion? I see two possible explanations: 1) It's a member of 6 different wikiprojects, and 2) It's included in a few templates and is therefore linked to by 188 other articles. As I understand it, the wikiproject banners and wikilinks have (artificially?) raised the importance of these articles to being included. But maybe I've misunderstood? Mlm42 ( talk) 00:33, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest the following articles be added to Iowa's articles:
Normally I would suggest that Ansel Briggs be added as first governor of Iowa, but his article is pretty much a content-free stub.
-- Philosopher Let us reason together. 15:46, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
(NOTE: I don't speak for WikiProject Video Games, and don't know if they plan to make any suggestions.)
The video games list presently includes the RuneScape article.
Can I ask that this revision be used? It has been restructured, has no dead links or {{ citation needed}} tags, and has less cruft content. Thank you. 1ForTheMoney ( talk) 19:47, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
In your choice of Korea-related as well as Rail transport articles and revisionIDs, you have chosen a version from August 31. However, the high-speed system that is the subject of the article has been expanded on November 1, 2010; and the article was put through a major overhaul for the occasion (mostly by me), affecting all of the text, the maps, and diagrams. Work is still in progress on some minor details, but if you need a link to a specific version, the current version should be good enough. -- Rontombontom ( talk) 12:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Update: another Rail transport article, Taiwan High Speed Rail, is in your selection with an August 29 revisionID. But this article was expanded, updated and thoroughly re-written, too (mostly by me), including the correction of some major (and unsourced) technical and historical mistakes. Again I recommend the use of the most current version. -- Rontombontom ( talk) 10:13, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
I started working on this pretty much when 0.8 selection was announced. However it was decided I had more important things to do with my time than improving articles so what would have taken me a day or two is still unfinished, and now needs to be handed over to someone else. Bearing in mind that this does not spot all typos, by any means, it is still a substantial list (I think I fixed about 1000).
I recommend skipping most RegexTypo hyphenation/dehyphenation changes as they seem EngVar (two-fold, right-handed, grand-daughter, step-sister). Also tv=>TV needs care and should often be "television", sometimes tv.
Regards,
Rich
Farmbrough,
01:52, 19 November 2010 (UTC).