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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
It's already been said that this suite of pages should be moved to Wikipedia: namespace. Before we do, though, could we consider a more descriptive name, since after all everything on Wikipedia is a wiki project ;) I suggest "presentation schemes". BTW, once we agree on a rename (and if so a name), I volunteer for the moving -- Tarquin, Wednesday, June 19, 2002
Quoting maveric149 from the mailing list:
Coming to those pages after the event, they seemed to be primarily about presentation of pages of similar type.
It seems to me that we currently have 4 rough meta- areas which overlap somewhat:
I feel that guidelines for presentation should live alongside naming conventions for pages: standard templates for things like the opening paragraph on an article on a person; chemical elements; countries; animals & plants. Tarquin, Thursday, June 20, 2002
This part of your query is policy related and should be continued on the wikipedia mailing list. I was talking about moving the issue of what to rename the WikiProject pages to when they do get moved over to the wikipedia:namespace. It looks like an emerging consensus is that the name should be wikipedia:projects and that wikipedia:naming conventions should be separate but cross-linked. -- maveric149
m:Presentation Conventions, just add an m: -- mav
BTW, I kinda like the term "WikiProject" now so please don't change it. Also, many of the templates here would not look as intended if these pages were moved to the wikipedia:namespace -- the yellow background will interfere with things. -- mav
Anybody interested in WikiProject Movies? Though I'd hate to have to rewrite all of the movie articles I've done. :) -- Zoe
Anyone interested in WikiProject Battles?
It can also solve the problem on sorting the battles chronologically, geographically, alphabetically or on any other criteria have not been thought of yet. If we have all information about a battle oragnizeg properly on its page, creating sorted lists is simply checking watch links and look for the specific criterion. Say one wants to sort by the alphabetical order on the first alphabet of the battle sites. One can copy-paste all geographically names, sort them and saving them on
[[List of battles (geographical order)/A]], [[List of battles (geographical order)/B]] etc.
The parent page of List of battles became linking page of all sorted lists.
eg.
[[List of battles (geographical order)]], [[List of battles (alphabetical order)]], [[List of battles (chronological order)]], etc.
A primitive prototype can be seen here Ktsquare Oct 19 2002
I have an idea... anyone interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Constellations? -- Lorenzarius
Anyone interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Age? -- PuzzletChung
Hi WikiProject folks, I just wanted to inform/remind you that according to our policy, temp pages should go in the Talk namespace, not the article namespace. See for example Egypt/Temp. Cheers, Cyan 02:14, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Moved from Wikipedia:Village pump/March 2003 archive 3 on Thursday, September 25th, 0 2003.
So Epopt organizes Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships, and we start applying it to keep the growing number of ship articles in order, then poor Zoe comes along to fix an apparent lameness in German battleship Bismarck, unaware of the obscure WikiProject that might have answered her puzzlement. What's a good way (other than posting here :-) ) to inform would-be energetic editors that a WikiProject exists, and that an article is being edited to conform to the pattern recommended by a particular WikiProject? Stan 06:28 Mar 20, 2003 (UTC)
From the village pump
This idea came to my mind: We should have special consultants for specific topics. For example, if an administrator is a lawyer or a law connseur, every article that has to do with law should be sent to that person for revision..what do you guys think? -- Antonio Who's that girl? Quien es esa nina, senorita presumida? Martin
Interesting idea, not least because a special consultant would have a good idea of what other articles and lists need a link to the new article. It's also trivial to implement, the simplest I can think being a discussion page per topic on which the self-declared consultants list new articles as they appear along with comments ranging from "looks fine to me" through "we should lobby to have this user banned" ;-). The danger is if consultants start to feel possessive about their topics, or if they feel they are the definitive Wikipedia authority on the subject. It's not much more of a danger than there is already, since anyone who chooses can already decide to police a particular topic. Pick one topic and do it, see if it flies. -- Onebyone 13:50, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Do I just put my name down? Or do i have to have contributed to articles on the subject or..?? —Noldoaran (Talk) 02:58, Dec 14, 2003 (UTC)
Wanted: people to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Poetry: please just sigh uo on that page. Bmills 09:16, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I started a Wikipedia:WikiProject Space. First of all, I would like people to join it. Also, would it be possible to include astronaut's, for example, as subcategories of both WikiProject Biography and WikiProject Space, or should they just be listed under Biography? Sennheiser 20:07, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
This poll is to determine the opinions of the Wikipedia community regarding a separate namespace for WikiProjects.
WikiProject: should be a namespace.
Please move your name to the list of votes above if you still support this idea.
See: #Pseudo-namespaces.
WikiProject: should not be a namespace.
I love the idea - there are a few project ideas I'm going to add - but why not use Wikiproject:Name instead of Wikipedia:Wikiproject_Name? It sakes more mense to me. - 戴眩sv 18:07, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Would anyone be interested helping with a Wikipedia:WikiProject Telescopes and/or Wikipedia:WikiProject Space Telescopes? Should a telescopes template include space telescopes? It/they could be modeled after the following articles:
-- zandperl 15:21, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Would anybody be interested in the various WikiProjects choosing something to be their representative article -- the one that includes everything an ideal article should, and is written well, etc. Perhaps to be a running list at Wikipedia:Featured articles (i.e. every WikiProject that has reached such a stage has the article listed at the top, with more added as they develop). Please respond at Wikipedia talk:Featured articles. Tuf-Kat 07:00, Feb 18, 2004 (UTC)
I'm going to remove links WikiProject that don't exist, haven't existed for a long time, and are unlikely to ever exist (unless they have child projects).
Here's the ones I'm planning on deleting:
Please, somebody remove the abandoned Wikipedia:WikiProject WikiAwards-- Joao Campos 17:45, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
More and more article types (Space Shuttle Missions and Albums, to name a couple) are getting rather complex standard formats, apparently under the heading "Wikiprojects". While I can see that from a user's perspective these are nice, if not necessarily more useful than straight text, but from a potential editor's perspective they are daunting. Two weeks ago if a neophyte potential editor clicked "edit this page" at Four Symbols, for example, he/she got a nice window with the first couple paragraphs of source text in it. A few formatting characters, too, but nothing he/she had to know to make an edit. Today if a newbie tries to edit the same page they get a faceful of quasi-HTML code -- run away! Yes, they can, if they are brave, scroll down to where the meat is, but I think folks who know and are comfortable with such markups highly underestimate the chilling effect they have on potential editors. As far as I can tell, Wikipedia has always valued content over form; it seems we want everybody, not just web gurus, to be able to effectively participate in the 'pedia both as a user and as an editor, right? Then there needs to be a way to do a formatless edit (actually an edit of text only keeping the existing format in place). I'd go so far to say that fancy formats should be put on hold until such a tool exists.
Forgive me if this has been or is being hashed out somewhere else, and if so, please point me. I think it's important, though. Jgm 06:03, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'm going to reorganize the list of projects on this page. I don't mean to step on anyone's toes -- revert what you don't like. Tuf-Kat 06:15, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)
Do people like placing the talk notices at the top of talk pages directing people to the WikiProject page? Primates and Albums both have msgs, and the Rambot put brief notes at US cities and counties. Any thoughts about what kind of links should be included in these? Should there be somewhat standardized messages among WikiProjects? Tuf-Kat 08:32, Apr 4, 2004 (UTC)
The Wikiproject on Alternative Medicine aims primarily to facilitate the development of professional looking articles on all aspects of complementary, alternative and integrative medicine. One of its goals is to end the never ending edit wars that exists in many of the alternative medicine related articles. At this stage of development, I am seeking:
Please take a few minutes of your time to leave your comments on Wikipedia talk:Wikiproject:Alternative Medicine. -- John Gohde, aka Mr-Natural-Health 17:06, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I've created a hybrid WikiProject box and opentasksbox at Template:Album. Any opinions on it? Tuf-Kat 07:29, May 1, 2004 (UTC)
Hi, I've just started a new project, Saints. -- Kpalion 22:58, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Hello, I just did a little restructuring of the Wikiprojects list today, renaming some of the categories. I don't think any of them should be objectionable, but please let me know if they are. More importantly, I have renamed/ changed the content of two of the Wikiprojects - Authors (empty) and Novels, under the Literature section. They appear not to have been much of a success. There is already a Wikiproject for Books, and I feel this is far too vague, and I have split the Books section further into Classic & Canonical Fiction, Contemporary, Poetry, Mass Market and Genre Fiction (previously called Novels), and Miscellaneous Prose. To include really vague sections - "novels" and "authors" under an already very vague section, makes things far too confusing. We should list either Authors or Books, not both (I prefer Books, since one Author might fit in too many categories); I am keeping an Authors LIST to make navigation quick, but that's all (it needs editing and lengthening); the link to the "Novels" section has been removed, but the page is still available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels in case someone wishes to retrieve for some reason. If it's not needed, please delete it.
I would also like to bring together as many people as possible to contribute to the main Literature Wikiproject, under which I hope to incorporate the History of Literature and mention numerous writers from all the world who may or may not be well known in the West, but are not given enough space anyway; similarly for the (new) Painting and Sculpture, Opera, International Cinema and any related projects. All comments, contributions etc welcome.
PS I haven't created the templates yet, just the Projects, as I am really really tired and will get back to them later. And I might post this on the Mailing List, so apologies if it gets repetitive.
Simonides 08:34, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
There's a lot of WikiProjects here, and a lot of them are not very active. There's also quite a lot of cases where, some months ago, someone has decided to create the thing, has never gone on with it, and so it has never really gotten off the ground. In amongst these, there's quite a few that are very active, and are doing a lot of good stuff.
I think it might be a good idea to divide this page into two, for active WikiProjects, and inactive ones. Thoughts?
This WikiProject is believed to be inactive. If you are not currently a member of the project, please consider joining it to help. See the WikiProject Guide for advice on reviving an inactive WikiProject.
Feel free to remove this tag if activity resumes or if this tag was placed in error. If some activity occurs in this Wikiproject, consider replacing this tag with {{ semi-active}}.
I would be interested to know which WikiProjects are very active ! Most projects are inactive, and I'm not ready to go through each of them to find out.
I really think that we need to do something about this, and I support the idea of pulling a list of active wikiProjects. It could be separate from the hierarchy though. So we could have a section above the hierarchy that would list the WikiProjects that have been active in the last month (based on the history of the wikiProject page). Pcarbonn 20:07, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sorry, that was me. ^^; I'm using Mozilla Firefox, and had two tabs open to different Wikipedia pages, and confused one with the other. Then I ended up moving this article by mistake, then I quickly realized what I did wrong, and moved it back. The other article name should be quickly deleted. - Gilgamesh 08:13, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Where should I put WikiProject Creatures?
I'd like to propose something. You may consider it a bit out of the Wikipedia context but I absolutely agree it is a great way for developing articles and estimulating the creation of new ones.
Yesterday I've started imagining a project which involved the cooperation of users and would present a good way for exploring Wikipedia: the WikiAwards. Something similar to the Academy Awards but more regularly made.
In the past hours I've created the Project and I'm now working hard on this. But, in the meantime, I recieved a message warning me that this would cause some controversy in Wikipedians (sorry but I'm relatively new to Wikipedia).
So, I'm asking your opinion whether I'll go on with this or not. Please, see the History category for an example. Thanks-- Gameiro Pais 00:59, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I don't know if there is a particular project out there with the aims of sorting stubs, but I would like to start one. -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:43, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
It is apparently now possible to add more namespaces. How would everybody feel about a WikiProject namespace? AFAIK, the only practical effect of such a change would be ease in linking, though it would presumably also allow for greater flexibility for our content users choosing what pages to swipe. Tuf-Kat 07:17, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)
Categories can be applied to talk pages. I don't see the purpose of this. anthony (see warning) 20:23, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The aims are simple: - create a template for the articles on every football league - organize the existent articles about the leagues
Anyone interested?-- Joao Campos 17:56, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I assume it will be OK if I remove the projects that don't even have any pages(i.e. are redlinks) in the hierarchy. If someone creates a page for them, they can add it back, eh? If this is wrong, feel free to revert. JesseW 22:03, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I just created a section above the full list of WikiProjects, called Active Projects. It's those projects whose linked page had been edited since 1 Oct 2004. I think it will help people find the projects that are still being worked on easier. Of course, if you are working on one of the projects that didn't make it into the list, and you edit your page, feel free to add it to the list! JesseW 00:13, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
This instruction is wrong. You can't use argments to a subst template(as Template:WikiProject is).
* '''Use {{[[Template:WikiProject|subst:WikiProject]]}}''' to create a skeleton project page.
JesseW 07:27, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I tried to find an Africa-related Project, but I don't think there is one. Wikipedia is really weak in Africa-related content. We need to fix that. — iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 04:35, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
Just started a Wikipedia:WikiProject NASCAR to improve the articles about NASCAR. If you're interested, add your name to the participants and join the discussion. Recury 07:27, 10 Dec 2004 (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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
It's already been said that this suite of pages should be moved to Wikipedia: namespace. Before we do, though, could we consider a more descriptive name, since after all everything on Wikipedia is a wiki project ;) I suggest "presentation schemes". BTW, once we agree on a rename (and if so a name), I volunteer for the moving -- Tarquin, Wednesday, June 19, 2002
Quoting maveric149 from the mailing list:
Coming to those pages after the event, they seemed to be primarily about presentation of pages of similar type.
It seems to me that we currently have 4 rough meta- areas which overlap somewhat:
I feel that guidelines for presentation should live alongside naming conventions for pages: standard templates for things like the opening paragraph on an article on a person; chemical elements; countries; animals & plants. Tarquin, Thursday, June 20, 2002
This part of your query is policy related and should be continued on the wikipedia mailing list. I was talking about moving the issue of what to rename the WikiProject pages to when they do get moved over to the wikipedia:namespace. It looks like an emerging consensus is that the name should be wikipedia:projects and that wikipedia:naming conventions should be separate but cross-linked. -- maveric149
m:Presentation Conventions, just add an m: -- mav
BTW, I kinda like the term "WikiProject" now so please don't change it. Also, many of the templates here would not look as intended if these pages were moved to the wikipedia:namespace -- the yellow background will interfere with things. -- mav
Anybody interested in WikiProject Movies? Though I'd hate to have to rewrite all of the movie articles I've done. :) -- Zoe
Anyone interested in WikiProject Battles?
It can also solve the problem on sorting the battles chronologically, geographically, alphabetically or on any other criteria have not been thought of yet. If we have all information about a battle oragnizeg properly on its page, creating sorted lists is simply checking watch links and look for the specific criterion. Say one wants to sort by the alphabetical order on the first alphabet of the battle sites. One can copy-paste all geographically names, sort them and saving them on
[[List of battles (geographical order)/A]], [[List of battles (geographical order)/B]] etc.
The parent page of List of battles became linking page of all sorted lists.
eg.
[[List of battles (geographical order)]], [[List of battles (alphabetical order)]], [[List of battles (chronological order)]], etc.
A primitive prototype can be seen here Ktsquare Oct 19 2002
I have an idea... anyone interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Constellations? -- Lorenzarius
Anyone interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Age? -- PuzzletChung
Hi WikiProject folks, I just wanted to inform/remind you that according to our policy, temp pages should go in the Talk namespace, not the article namespace. See for example Egypt/Temp. Cheers, Cyan 02:14, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Moved from Wikipedia:Village pump/March 2003 archive 3 on Thursday, September 25th, 0 2003.
So Epopt organizes Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships, and we start applying it to keep the growing number of ship articles in order, then poor Zoe comes along to fix an apparent lameness in German battleship Bismarck, unaware of the obscure WikiProject that might have answered her puzzlement. What's a good way (other than posting here :-) ) to inform would-be energetic editors that a WikiProject exists, and that an article is being edited to conform to the pattern recommended by a particular WikiProject? Stan 06:28 Mar 20, 2003 (UTC)
From the village pump
This idea came to my mind: We should have special consultants for specific topics. For example, if an administrator is a lawyer or a law connseur, every article that has to do with law should be sent to that person for revision..what do you guys think? -- Antonio Who's that girl? Quien es esa nina, senorita presumida? Martin
Interesting idea, not least because a special consultant would have a good idea of what other articles and lists need a link to the new article. It's also trivial to implement, the simplest I can think being a discussion page per topic on which the self-declared consultants list new articles as they appear along with comments ranging from "looks fine to me" through "we should lobby to have this user banned" ;-). The danger is if consultants start to feel possessive about their topics, or if they feel they are the definitive Wikipedia authority on the subject. It's not much more of a danger than there is already, since anyone who chooses can already decide to police a particular topic. Pick one topic and do it, see if it flies. -- Onebyone 13:50, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Do I just put my name down? Or do i have to have contributed to articles on the subject or..?? —Noldoaran (Talk) 02:58, Dec 14, 2003 (UTC)
Wanted: people to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Poetry: please just sigh uo on that page. Bmills 09:16, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I started a Wikipedia:WikiProject Space. First of all, I would like people to join it. Also, would it be possible to include astronaut's, for example, as subcategories of both WikiProject Biography and WikiProject Space, or should they just be listed under Biography? Sennheiser 20:07, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
This poll is to determine the opinions of the Wikipedia community regarding a separate namespace for WikiProjects.
WikiProject: should be a namespace.
Please move your name to the list of votes above if you still support this idea.
See: #Pseudo-namespaces.
WikiProject: should not be a namespace.
I love the idea - there are a few project ideas I'm going to add - but why not use Wikiproject:Name instead of Wikipedia:Wikiproject_Name? It sakes more mense to me. - 戴眩sv 18:07, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Would anyone be interested helping with a Wikipedia:WikiProject Telescopes and/or Wikipedia:WikiProject Space Telescopes? Should a telescopes template include space telescopes? It/they could be modeled after the following articles:
-- zandperl 15:21, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Would anybody be interested in the various WikiProjects choosing something to be their representative article -- the one that includes everything an ideal article should, and is written well, etc. Perhaps to be a running list at Wikipedia:Featured articles (i.e. every WikiProject that has reached such a stage has the article listed at the top, with more added as they develop). Please respond at Wikipedia talk:Featured articles. Tuf-Kat 07:00, Feb 18, 2004 (UTC)
I'm going to remove links WikiProject that don't exist, haven't existed for a long time, and are unlikely to ever exist (unless they have child projects).
Here's the ones I'm planning on deleting:
Please, somebody remove the abandoned Wikipedia:WikiProject WikiAwards-- Joao Campos 17:45, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
More and more article types (Space Shuttle Missions and Albums, to name a couple) are getting rather complex standard formats, apparently under the heading "Wikiprojects". While I can see that from a user's perspective these are nice, if not necessarily more useful than straight text, but from a potential editor's perspective they are daunting. Two weeks ago if a neophyte potential editor clicked "edit this page" at Four Symbols, for example, he/she got a nice window with the first couple paragraphs of source text in it. A few formatting characters, too, but nothing he/she had to know to make an edit. Today if a newbie tries to edit the same page they get a faceful of quasi-HTML code -- run away! Yes, they can, if they are brave, scroll down to where the meat is, but I think folks who know and are comfortable with such markups highly underestimate the chilling effect they have on potential editors. As far as I can tell, Wikipedia has always valued content over form; it seems we want everybody, not just web gurus, to be able to effectively participate in the 'pedia both as a user and as an editor, right? Then there needs to be a way to do a formatless edit (actually an edit of text only keeping the existing format in place). I'd go so far to say that fancy formats should be put on hold until such a tool exists.
Forgive me if this has been or is being hashed out somewhere else, and if so, please point me. I think it's important, though. Jgm 06:03, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'm going to reorganize the list of projects on this page. I don't mean to step on anyone's toes -- revert what you don't like. Tuf-Kat 06:15, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)
Do people like placing the talk notices at the top of talk pages directing people to the WikiProject page? Primates and Albums both have msgs, and the Rambot put brief notes at US cities and counties. Any thoughts about what kind of links should be included in these? Should there be somewhat standardized messages among WikiProjects? Tuf-Kat 08:32, Apr 4, 2004 (UTC)
The Wikiproject on Alternative Medicine aims primarily to facilitate the development of professional looking articles on all aspects of complementary, alternative and integrative medicine. One of its goals is to end the never ending edit wars that exists in many of the alternative medicine related articles. At this stage of development, I am seeking:
Please take a few minutes of your time to leave your comments on Wikipedia talk:Wikiproject:Alternative Medicine. -- John Gohde, aka Mr-Natural-Health 17:06, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I've created a hybrid WikiProject box and opentasksbox at Template:Album. Any opinions on it? Tuf-Kat 07:29, May 1, 2004 (UTC)
Hi, I've just started a new project, Saints. -- Kpalion 22:58, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Hello, I just did a little restructuring of the Wikiprojects list today, renaming some of the categories. I don't think any of them should be objectionable, but please let me know if they are. More importantly, I have renamed/ changed the content of two of the Wikiprojects - Authors (empty) and Novels, under the Literature section. They appear not to have been much of a success. There is already a Wikiproject for Books, and I feel this is far too vague, and I have split the Books section further into Classic & Canonical Fiction, Contemporary, Poetry, Mass Market and Genre Fiction (previously called Novels), and Miscellaneous Prose. To include really vague sections - "novels" and "authors" under an already very vague section, makes things far too confusing. We should list either Authors or Books, not both (I prefer Books, since one Author might fit in too many categories); I am keeping an Authors LIST to make navigation quick, but that's all (it needs editing and lengthening); the link to the "Novels" section has been removed, but the page is still available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels in case someone wishes to retrieve for some reason. If it's not needed, please delete it.
I would also like to bring together as many people as possible to contribute to the main Literature Wikiproject, under which I hope to incorporate the History of Literature and mention numerous writers from all the world who may or may not be well known in the West, but are not given enough space anyway; similarly for the (new) Painting and Sculpture, Opera, International Cinema and any related projects. All comments, contributions etc welcome.
PS I haven't created the templates yet, just the Projects, as I am really really tired and will get back to them later. And I might post this on the Mailing List, so apologies if it gets repetitive.
Simonides 08:34, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
There's a lot of WikiProjects here, and a lot of them are not very active. There's also quite a lot of cases where, some months ago, someone has decided to create the thing, has never gone on with it, and so it has never really gotten off the ground. In amongst these, there's quite a few that are very active, and are doing a lot of good stuff.
I think it might be a good idea to divide this page into two, for active WikiProjects, and inactive ones. Thoughts?
This WikiProject is believed to be inactive. If you are not currently a member of the project, please consider joining it to help. See the WikiProject Guide for advice on reviving an inactive WikiProject.
Feel free to remove this tag if activity resumes or if this tag was placed in error. If some activity occurs in this Wikiproject, consider replacing this tag with {{ semi-active}}.
I would be interested to know which WikiProjects are very active ! Most projects are inactive, and I'm not ready to go through each of them to find out.
I really think that we need to do something about this, and I support the idea of pulling a list of active wikiProjects. It could be separate from the hierarchy though. So we could have a section above the hierarchy that would list the WikiProjects that have been active in the last month (based on the history of the wikiProject page). Pcarbonn 20:07, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sorry, that was me. ^^; I'm using Mozilla Firefox, and had two tabs open to different Wikipedia pages, and confused one with the other. Then I ended up moving this article by mistake, then I quickly realized what I did wrong, and moved it back. The other article name should be quickly deleted. - Gilgamesh 08:13, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Where should I put WikiProject Creatures?
I'd like to propose something. You may consider it a bit out of the Wikipedia context but I absolutely agree it is a great way for developing articles and estimulating the creation of new ones.
Yesterday I've started imagining a project which involved the cooperation of users and would present a good way for exploring Wikipedia: the WikiAwards. Something similar to the Academy Awards but more regularly made.
In the past hours I've created the Project and I'm now working hard on this. But, in the meantime, I recieved a message warning me that this would cause some controversy in Wikipedians (sorry but I'm relatively new to Wikipedia).
So, I'm asking your opinion whether I'll go on with this or not. Please, see the History category for an example. Thanks-- Gameiro Pais 00:59, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I don't know if there is a particular project out there with the aims of sorting stubs, but I would like to start one. -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:43, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
It is apparently now possible to add more namespaces. How would everybody feel about a WikiProject namespace? AFAIK, the only practical effect of such a change would be ease in linking, though it would presumably also allow for greater flexibility for our content users choosing what pages to swipe. Tuf-Kat 07:17, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)
Categories can be applied to talk pages. I don't see the purpose of this. anthony (see warning) 20:23, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The aims are simple: - create a template for the articles on every football league - organize the existent articles about the leagues
Anyone interested?-- Joao Campos 17:56, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I assume it will be OK if I remove the projects that don't even have any pages(i.e. are redlinks) in the hierarchy. If someone creates a page for them, they can add it back, eh? If this is wrong, feel free to revert. JesseW 22:03, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I just created a section above the full list of WikiProjects, called Active Projects. It's those projects whose linked page had been edited since 1 Oct 2004. I think it will help people find the projects that are still being worked on easier. Of course, if you are working on one of the projects that didn't make it into the list, and you edit your page, feel free to add it to the list! JesseW 00:13, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
This instruction is wrong. You can't use argments to a subst template(as Template:WikiProject is).
* '''Use {{[[Template:WikiProject|subst:WikiProject]]}}''' to create a skeleton project page.
JesseW 07:27, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I tried to find an Africa-related Project, but I don't think there is one. Wikipedia is really weak in Africa-related content. We need to fix that. — iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 04:35, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
Just started a Wikipedia:WikiProject NASCAR to improve the articles about NASCAR. If you're interested, add your name to the participants and join the discussion. Recury 07:27, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)