![]() | This page 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. |
Shouldn't there be some mention of non-article classes (Category, List, Template, Redirect, etc.) in the Assessment FAQ? — KCinDC ( talk) 16:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, all. As we know, the Version 1.0 Index stores assessments for over 1.7 million articles. Originally, the bot was designed to process about 10,000 articles; we never actually thought that 70% of Wikipedia was going to be covered under some sort of assessment. That has slowly caused the bot to take longer to run, as bot runs that used to last about four hours now take about four days. To make the bot more efficient, changes to the way the bot framework operates are being discussed, and simultaneously, we are discussing which features it might be worthwhile to add as we are recoding everything. We really would like to have your participation at User:WP 1.0 bot/Second generation and its talk page as we do this. Thanks, Titoxd( ?!? - cool stuff) 16:43, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been redesigning the San Francisco Bay Area project's page using Clockwork soul's various designs for Virus project etc. (my redesign is currently in my sandbox). I haven't filled out the participants list yet, but I also wanted to poll the participants list because I think many of them have gone inactive. I'm fine with manually entering the participants into the new participants list and then polling them to resign, but is there any recommended way of polling participants? - Optigan13 ( talk) 04:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
I think there should be a process similar to the proposal process to makeing a wikiproject inactive. Here Ford 20:25, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I see a lot of WikiProjects that have a section, usually at or near the top, like this:
==Title==
<Name of project>
Is there any need for such sections? Surely the title of the WikiProject is obvious from the title at the top, and from the rest of the page. Should we not systematically remove such sections, possibly with the help of a bot? Richard001 ( talk) 07:11, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
This project's name has come up on the talk page for Wikipedia:Coordinators, as a suggested alterntive to turning the coordinator page into a guideline. Input from this projects members on the matter would be apreciated. TomStar81 ( Talk) 09:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Ahh, I came here looking for my answer, and now, thanks to the recent debates, leave more confused than ever!
Is there any rule ANYWHERE that says articles that clearly fall into the scope of a descendant category can or can't be also tagged by the parent? I refer specifically to WP:MED and its descendants. There are articles like Abductor digiti minimi muscle (foot) that very clearly fall under WikiProject Anatomy, but are also tagged by WP:MED. Should they be? — Skittleys ( talk) 03:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Please see the ongoing discussion regarding the use of WikiProject banners on the talk pages of non-article pages. Thanks, – Black Falcon ( Talk) 23:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Please see the naming convention proposal. LA ( T) @ 21:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, i am part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels and am asking if any assistance can be provided to help with this Project since it is a major project on Wikipedia.
I will explain as best i can what has happened as there seem to some sudden change of activity for some unknown reason in regards to this Project. The project was running well under the Founder Kevinalewis. Then about 5 months ago a new member joined who claimed the Project was not been running correctly and requested a Election be held as they wished to become Project Leader and that he would then elect his own committee chosen by himself, of course this idea was not popular. A election was commenced and Kevinalewis decided to then state that he did not seek re-election and would rather someone else take over the position. After much debate in the nomination section, this new member would only answer with abusive remarks if questioned on what plans or experience he had to become the Project Leader. I did a check on this new member DangerTM and discovered he was actually a sockpuppet of Tom.mevlie who had tried to take over and disrupt other Projects, so he was removed as a candidate.
Yllosubmarine won the election, Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators and has been very active since. But after that we have had a dropping off of members who were responsible for such important features such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Outreach (if you look they are all inactive or have resigned) which handles the newsletter and no newsletter had been published now for almost 3 months. I did leave a message for the temporary editor Feydey but he has not responded even though he has contributed articles since then.
All i can think is that there has maybe been some lack of support for the new Project Leader who has suddenly found themselves without any help of Coordinators, Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators and that the Project is losing the interest of members. I have requsted to take over the newsletter, as i have contributed most of the tipline articles over the last year, to try and get it out each month again and to improve it so as to revitalise the Project and its members.
If there is anyone who can assist us in helping to get this Project back on track and advise us of what is needed, it be greatly appreciated, if they can leave a message for me. Too many Projects i have seen die and become inactive and i would hate to see this happen to this Project just because of a change of Leadership and disruption caused by that abusive sockpuppet. This Project is important to Wikipedia and should be continually becoming stronger rather than weakening. Regards Boylo ( talk) 03:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Proposal to merge need image categories of WikiProjects and reqphoto template categories. Do we really need to distinguish the difference between images and photographs? please see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Photography#Requests for Pictures, Images and Photographs --[unsigned]
Another editor and I are having a stylistic difference of opinion and I'd like some feedback on if there is - or should be - a manual of style, or other, guideline that addresses nesting project banners without using a bannershell. See Talk:Kinsey Reports, for instance. I believe the "nested=yes" parameter was designed for use with the banner shell but this has not won them over to using it. I find it a bit of an eyesore but they, of course see the banner shell as a bit of an eyesore so I'd like some other imput to see if there is already consensus on this or some ideas that may help resolve this. Any thoughts? Banjeboi 22:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
|nested=yes
setting should not be used straight onto a page, because it does not follow the convention used for all messageboxes (in all namespaces) of having 80% width.
(also)
Happy‑
melon 23:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)I think that clearly,
![]() | LGBT studies B‑class | ||||||
|
![]() | Sexology and sexuality B‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
|
Looks cleaner than:
![]() | LGBT studies B‑class | ||||||
|
![]() | Sexology and sexuality B‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
|
I understand that not everyone sees things the same way. Hence my trying to work a standard out the WP Sexuality, to get feedback from a wide variety of people rather than getting in a pissing contest.
Atom ( talk) 02:04, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A simpler option that uses less real estate on the screen is {{
WPB}}:
![]() | This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This has the advantage of not requiring someone to type in on every page. I find it particularly useful when there are more than three banners to hide on a talk page with many templates vying for attention. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 06:41, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
{{
WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes}}
is preferable; one day we'll finally get around to merging these two templates.
(also)
Happy‑
melon 08:38, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
{{
WPB|...}}
with {{
WPBS|collapsed=yes|...}}
and see how long it takes people to notice the difference. If we can get the banners to nest automatically inside banner shells then the two templates will be indistinguishable.
(also)
Happy‑
melon 10:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)I am having a lot of problems trying to find a bot that can deliver a newsletter for our Novels Project. There is a list of bots on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Newsletters but from looking at them, they seem all inactive and some have outstanding newsletters sitting still unsended for quite awhile. I have been moving the request to different bots to try and find one that is active but without success. If anyone has details of a active bot for newsletter deliveries can they post here. Boylo ( talk) 02:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Here are some others to check out. Category:Newsletter_delivery_bots Looks like User:MiszaBot may work. Atom ( talk) 03:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
An MfD needs your expertise. Please consider commenting at Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Red_Faction. Thanks. -- Suntag ( talk) 02:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Label | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() {{ FA-Class}} |
The article has attained
Featured article status.
|
Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information. | No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. |
Tourette Syndrome (as of June 2008) | ||||
![]() {{ FL-Class}} |
The article has attained
Featured list status.
|
FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives (as of January 2008) | ||||||
![]() {{ A-Class}} |
The article is well organized and is essentially complete, having been reviewed by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere, as described
here.
|
Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. | Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style issues may need addressing. Peer-review may help. |
Durian (as of March 2007) | ||||
![]() {{ GA-Class}} |
The article has attained
Good article status.
|
Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (although not equalling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia. | Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing. |
International Space Station (as of February 2007) | ||||
B {{ B-Class}} |
The article is mostly complete and without major issues, but requires some further work to reach
Good Article standards. B-Class articles should meet the
six B-Class criteria:
|
No reader should be left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher. | A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed, and expert knowledge is increasingly needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should also be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the manual of style and related style guidelines. |
Jammu and Kashmir (as of October 2007) | ||||
C {{ C-Class}} |
The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial
cleanup.
|
Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study. | Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and address cleanup issues. |
Exeter Cathedral (as of June 2008) | ||||
Start {{ Start-Class}} |
An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources.
|
Provides some meaningful content, but the majority of readers will need more. | Provision of references to reliable sources should be prioritised; the article will also need substantial improvements in content and organisation. |
Real analysis (as of November 2006) | ||||
Stub {{ Stub-Class}} |
A very basic description of the topic.
|
Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition | Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. |
Coffee table book (as of July 2005) |
As you can see from this, almost all grades are added on what type of article it is or the quality of the article. However, a major grade list missing that has been added to the assessment - List-rated articles, obviously articles that are lists. So shouldn't this be added? If so, what should be put? Simply south ( talk) 22:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Can someone point me to a page on how to merge two projects? I haven't been able to find one. Thanks and regards. -- Klein zach 06:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Recent code updates have made it possible to significantly improve the handling of WikiProject banner nesting, deprecating the |nested=yes
system. See
Template talk:WikiProjectBannerShell#New implementation of WikiProject banners for more details.
Happy‑
melon 19:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
I have just added a new entry to the WikiProject automation directory: ArticleAlertbot can notify projects when their articles are nominated for AfD, as featured article candidates, for RFC, and more of such workflows. This could for example enhance the sorting of deletion debates considerably. See User:B. Wolterding/Article alerts for more information. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 21:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
In order to help facilitate easier location of potential sources of offline information to help verify the notability of article subjects and contents, I have created Category:WikiProject reference libraries and placed into it all of the reference library pages of which I am aware. Please add more project reference libraries to this category if you know of more. Additionally, feel free to create new reference library pages for any particular project as well. They can be very useful. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I've noticed a problem with our project template, Template:WikiProject Psychology, that I would like to get some advice on. There is a link to a "Comments" subpage that should be used for comments relating to the rating of the article. However, novice users seem to sometimes be confused by this, every now and then I see comments that should have been placed on the Talk page for the article instead being placed on the "/Comments" page, with the effect of the comments going unnoticed. I would like to know if other projects have had or have this problem, and how they have dealt with it. (also see discussion here) / skagedal talk 09:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Is there any precedent, procedure, or guideliens to follow if we want to turn an inactive WikiProject into taskforces of another WikiProject? There's a lot of WikiProjects devoted to musical groups that couldn't sustain themselves, and we over at WP:ALM were discussing turning some of the more useful ones that fall under our scope into taskforces. WesleyDodds ( talk) 08:57, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
The discussion on the implementation of a 'trial' configuration of FlaggedRevisions on en.wiki has now reached the 'straw poll' stage. All editors are invited to read the proposal and discussion and to participate in the straw poll. Happy‑ melon 18:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
I have requested for a bot to manage WikiProject contests. See Wikipedia:Bot_requests#Bot_to_run_WikiProject_contests. Please provide your input on the bot request page. Thanks, Ganeshk ( talk) 07:25, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I have requested a bot to create project watchlists here. As you can see, a user kindly did a generation of pages for the projects I named, but I think we need an automated bot for this run by members of the WikiProject Council. I expand upon this in the WPCouncil Guide talk. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:41, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
This may have been discussed before but I am not up to wading through the archives.
I started working on the articles in Category:Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts and I am resolving the non-trivial conflicts. (There are conflicts on two js pages and conflicts occur in Sandboxes. I am leaving them alone.) There appear to be two major causes for conflict.
The most common cause is that some project banners, most notably Biography and Greece, use the listas parameter whether it is there or not. If the parameter is not completed the sort value is reset to the PAGENAME. This causes a conflict when one banner has a completed listas and another does not.
The second cause for conflict is when the DEFAULTSORT template is placed on the page. As I understand it the DEFAULTSORT template is only to be used on the article page not on the discussion page but some well-meaning editors have been putting it on the discussion page, possibly because they have found the article has been sorted incorrectly in some list. Often the DEFAULTSORT value is incorrect. (For "Janet Montgomerie, Countess of Eglinton" the DEFAULTSORT was "Eglinton, Janet Montgomerie, Countess of". I kid you not.)
Could this Council reach a consensus among all the projects that when a Project Banner is applied the listas parameter is completed? While you are at it, could there also be a consensus that all templates will have the nested parameter set to yes? There has been concern expressed about the appearance of the talk pages of those article that are in many categories. Some projects banners will contract automatically if nested is set to yes. Others need to be enclosed in the WikiProjectBanners template or the WikiProjectBannerShell template. The former does a much better job of contracting the banners but a couple of banners ignore it and insist upon the latter.
I think that implementing the above will make life much easier for casual users and for editors who are working at making things better.
Thank you.
I think you understand correctly. As far as I can see you have both overstated and understated the case of "something bad happens.
Listas
Most often a mildly instrusive error message will appear on the page above the offending tag, if the tags have been nested the offending tag is no longer nested and the Talk Page is listed on
Category:Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts. If this were the worst that happened, this problem belongs in the bottom 100 of things to be addressed.
Sometimes, see the 09:56, 25 July 2008, version of Talk:Dimitrios Gounaris, where the Biobraphy tag had the correct listas value and the Greece tag had no listas value, the offending banner explodes. The Greece banner is the only one that I have seen explode so far and I think it only happens under very limited conditions, but the fact that it happens at all should be enough to move the problem much higher on the list of things to be addressed and the folks in the Greece project will be screaming bloody murder to get the problem fixed immediately once a few of them notice it.
Yes, I do want every tag to have a valid listas value. I do not think that it is impossible for a project to ever have a person in it and if the project completes the listas parameter for that one person it is not left for some one else to fix. Also, it is not only people that need a listas parameter.
Nesting
I merely think that nested tags look better than those that are not nested. I think that most users go to the Talk page to look at the discussions. The project listing may be interesting to them but it is certainly not important. A member of a project who is looking at the Talk Page of an article already knows that the article is part of the Project but may want to update information in the banner. The information cannot be seen easily without editing the page but the member has to edit the page anyway.
{{ WPBS}} and automatic nesting are just fine for articles that are in a few projects. When a simple list of the projects fills a screen I think it is time for {{ WPB}}. There are articles in the Biography, Greece, Italy, MilHist and Middle Ages projects, some of those are in other countries' projects as well. There are articles in Biography, MilHist and US Congress projects plus at least one US State project and at least one City project. Irish Politicians and Irish Unionists enjoy similar popularity.
I realize that well-behaved banners will automatically nest if placed within {{ WPBS}}. However, many templates are not well-behaved. If all the templates were well-behaved {{ WPBS}} would not be necessary because nested=yes would accomplish the same thing.
I think that nesting is an important issue mainly for those who care about how things look and how things should look and that if you ask twelve people what they think, you will get at least thirteen opinions. The listas issue affects accessiblity to information and I believe ease of accessibility should the underlying "pillar" to almost every web site, most especially WP.
Did that help?
JimCubb ( talk) 19:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
|listas=
issue that you bring up is certainly a well-known and serious problem. The issue is multi-levelled as you say. The issue that DEFAULTSORT is intended to resolve is where pages like
Talk:Albert Einstein are listed under "A" instead of "E"; pages like
Talk:Water should not need a DEFAULTSORT because sorting under "W" is entirely correct here. What actually happens, unfortunately, is that both these pages will in the absence of any correcting factors categorise under "T", because for some reason no one can fathom the namespace prefix is included. There is an active bug (
T18552) open to resolve this; if you have a Bugzilla account I strongly encourage you to go and vote for that bug to get it implemented ASAP. When that happens, pages like
Talk:Water will not need any category-sorting treatment; they can be left in their 'natural state'. The fact that such pages hugely outnumber pages where there is a legitimate use for DEFAULTSORTs indicates that it is counterproductive to simply require |listas=
parameters on all banners. Rather, it will be easy and effective to reconfigure all banners to only define a DEFAULTSORT if a value is explicitly given through |listas=
. That way, the only DEFAULTSORT conflicts that will occur is when two banners on a page specify different DEFAULTSORT sortkeys, which is very easy to fix by removing one of them or changing them to both be the same. While it would be a good idea for every WikiProject banner to support a |listas=
parameter (so that adding a DEFAULTSORT can be done by editing the first banner on a page, whichever project that might be), requiring every listas parameter to be set (when they would all need to be the same and might be duplicated ten or more times on popular pages), is totally unnecessary.{{
WikiProjectBanners}}
template is itself deprecated; the functionality that you suggest is available by calling {{
WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes}}
. You have two contradictory definitions of "well-behaved": the well behaved banners are the ones that adapt automatically to the presence of a banner shell. WikiProject Banners should not be nested outside WPB or WPBS because the resulting appearance is against the guidelines at
WP:TPT. Whenever there are more than three WikiProject banners on a page, a WPBS shell should be introduced. If there are more than 8 or 9 banners, consider adding |collapsed=yes
to the banner shell. In no circumstances should it be necessary to collapse banners without a shell, or to use WPB.{{
WPBS|collapsed=yes}}
(or {{
WPBS|collapsed=yes|banner collapse=no}}
if you want to precisely duplicate WPB) retains those styles while still taking advantage of the superior features of the other banner. So, by no means are the WPB styles deprecated; sorry if I gave that impression.
Happy‑
melon 10:42, 9 January 2009 (UTC)Unfortunately, it does. It is so much easier to type a pipe and "nested=yes" once, copy them and past them a couple of times than it is to type two left braces, "WPBS|1=", scroll to the end of the tags and type two right braces. Visually, they are identical. It is also much, much easier to use WPB than to type all that stuff to make WPBS do the same thing.
I could not find where WP:TPT said that banners cannot be nested outside WPB or WPBS. I had a brief giggle, though, at the example given there. Not only is WPB used but each of the banners has the value for nested set at yes, even the WP Biography banner which doesn't need it to behave correctly within a shell. (None of the banners have a completed listas parameter but no one has put a DEFAULTSORT on the page either. I think the latter will happen eventually.)
The giggle at the Pope's Talk page was preceeded by one at the conflict I had just resolved. There are three banners on the page. Biography was first, followed by MilHist and I do not remember the third. There was no shell of either kind but all three has nested=yes. The MilHist banner did not cooperate but the other two did. I used WPBS and took "nested=yes" off of all the banners. The MilHist banner did not nest but the other two did. I put "nested=yes" back into MilHist and it behaved. Do you suppose there is some correlation between the name of the project and the way its banner behaves?
I do not think the current version of Talk:Hiero I of Syracuse is at all funny. Six projects, only the first two are in the banner shell and pieces of the Greece banner are all over the place. It is beyond ugly. Had I seen something like it when I first started doing this I would have wanted to run away and hide. Now I know that copy and paste or cut and paste will solve all the problems.
JimCubb ( talk) 22:19, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
|nested=yes
:D.
|nested=
parameter and so are more in line with
WP:TPT. The reason WPBS did not work as you expected it to on
Talk:Hiero I of Syracuse was because of a simple (although easy to make) formatting error
[1].
Happy‑
melon 22:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)|nested=yes
to each banner, while you only need to add the wrapper template once. So it's considerably more than eleven characters.
Happy‑
melon 10:44, 9 January 2009 (UTC)I have found that some banners will obey WPB and WPBS only if nested=yes. Rather than try to remember which ones they are I paste "nested=yes" into every banner on my way down to typing the two right braces at the end. I do the same for the listas parameter.
I will always use WPB for living people. The living=yes in the WPBiog banner does not produce the BLP banner if the WPBiog banner is nested and |blp=yes does not seem to work unless it is in a shell.
One other thing that I am doing with living people is to make certain the BLP banner is on top of the list. I have observed that the folks who care about the sensitivity of BLP really care about it. In the interest of self-preservation I think it wise to stay on their good sides.
I have created an SVG of the logo for you guys to use, if you want to. Any suggestions or queries, please ask them here, but please drop me a note at my talk too, as I don't have this page watchlisted (tend not to use it much). — neuro (talk) 12:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Again, this may be in the archives and I promise that as soon as I have an afternoon with absolutely nothing else to do I will read the archives but Is there a suggested order for Project banners on a page?
I assume that the Talk banner should be on top, even though it is huge, and if the article is about a living person the blp banner should be as close to the to as possible but what comes next? Does it matter?
{{
skiptotoc}}
(or variants) for obvious reasons, then {{
Talk header}}
, then {{
blp}}
in whatever incarnation it takes (from {{
WPBiography}}
, {{
WPBS}}
or on its own on rare occasions; this requirement can fix the position of other templates, as {{
WPBS}}
and {{
ArticleHistory}}
are usually placed adjacent to each other. It's also customary that {{
archive box}}
goes at the bottom of the stack. Other than these, there really aren't any conventions, especially when there is no shell template on a page (although WikiProject banners are usually placed together).
Happy‑
melon 17:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Cool! I have been moving {{
WPBiography}}
to the top when it provided the blp banner unless I saw a reason not to do so. When I did not move it I have used {{
blp}}
. I stopped trying to follow a hierarchy, such as general to specific, when I realized that almost nobody cared. Thank you.
About two years ago someone had the bright idea that the list of categories at the bottom of an artcle was too big and some of those categories should be moved to the Talk page. Within the last couple of months a bot has started to do that. As a result, the top of the Talk page is becoming more cluttered and the category listing at the bottom of the Talk page is getting longer. Some projects have already made their banner-generated categories hidden, that is, they do not show on the the page that generates them. Could the basic banner and all project banners be modified so that their administrative categories are hidden?
It does no one any good to see at the bottom of a talk page that the article is an "Unknown-priority biography (sports and games) article". If one cares about such things the list of banner-generated categories at the Project page is where it should be found. There should be a way to put at the bottom of a page that a page belongs to a number of categories that are not visible with a link to instructions on how to see the hidden categories.
I am going to make this suggestion to the Biography project as that project covers at least 20% of the pages in Wikipedia.
For anyone who is interested, Derek Andrews has created Template:No selected item which can be used as a warning for selecting items such as selected article and selected picture not being displayed the next month. Simply south is this a buffet? 21:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
{{
portalwarning}}
as used by
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports and others.
Nanonic (
talk) 22:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)I'm managing WikiProject Neuroscience currently, and one thing that's very clear is that hardly anybody ever looks at our portal, Portal:Neuroscience, which gives not much motivation for maintaining it. What needs to be done is to increase the visibility of portal links from the basic articles on the topic, such as Neuroscience and Brain. I can think of several ways to do it, but all of them have problems. The ideal would be to have the portal link on the title line, at the upper right, but as far as I know that isn't possible. Putting it at the upper right of the lead gives a really ugly appearance if there is an image in the lead -- and putting it below the image makes it too hard to notice. I'm tempted to put it at the upper left of the lead, but that seems too obtrusive. Any suggestions? If this has been discussed before, a pointer to the previous discussion would be appreciated. Looie496 ( talk) 17:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
I recall discussion of a bot that could remove inactive members from a project, but I can't recall where the discussion was. Anyone have any clues? Hiding T 12:06, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Wondering if any experienced WikiProject people would like to help us get Wikipedia:WikiProject Blogging on its feet. Computerjoe 's talk 19:46, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I wasn't sure where to post this, so I'll try here. My proposal is for an alternative wikiproject directory that is more compact and will shorten the number of hops required to reach a particular project. Here is an example for your consideration:
Science · Aviation · Biology · Chemistry · Computing · Economics · Geosciences · Health and fitness · Information science · Mathematics · Meteorology · Physics · Space · Technology · Time
Thank you.— RJH ( talk) 19:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
That looks good. I think a similar thing is needed for the proposals. Rd232 talk 12:10, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
A proposal to change the structure of the project proposal page has been elaborated here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Subpage idea. It would, AFD-style, give each proposal its own subpage. Comments please. Rd232 talk 12:00, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Creating a proposal
This box is to propose WikiProjects or Task forces that you wish to create. Please make sure you have read the relevent guides that are listed below: Create a new subpage by typing in the name of the proposed WikiProject/Task Force in the input box below (after "/Proposals/") and clicking "create page." Then, follow the instructions at the top of the page to add a description of the proposed project: If there is already a proposal there with the same name as your project (you can tell because there should be no hidden messages, and a proper signature instead of ~~~~), either change the name of the project or add your name to the list of supporters. |
I suggest if no opposition has been voiced by 5 April (a week from when it was first mentioned, plus a bit), you go ahead and do it. It's a big improvement. Rd232 talk 15:57, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I believe the "SWPP" section should be removed. Please reply here. ~EdGl ★ 17:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I recently joined the wikiproject Aquarium fishes, only to find that no one had posted in it since january. Is there any way to take control of this wikiproject and save the work that has already been done while removing inactive members, and moving control of newsletters and such to someone else? Drew R. Smith ( talk) 13:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Try as I might, I can't seem to find the answer: once a project proposal attracts sufficient members, how do you actually create a new project namespace on (Wikipedia:Wikiproject....)? Thanks. Tobit2 ( talk) 23:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Question answered. Create like any other page. Just type in Wikipedia:WikiProject (project name). Tobit2 ( talk)
It appears that several California related WikiProjects have become dead, or have limited activity. I've started task force conversion discussions for several daughter projects. I'm a bit concerned that I might be running a bit past being bold and if I need some clue adjustment. The discussions are all linked from WT:CAL so any advice, suggestions, or clue adjustment would be appreciated. - Optigan13 ( talk) 06:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject VVMAP seems to be the creation (in October 2008) of its only active member, Cooljuno411 ( talk · contribs). I've yet to see any articles tagged with the project or any visible work on behalf of this project. It was kept via Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject VVMAP in the same month and year. I feel it's a dead or useless project but wanted to get input from more seasoned editors in regards to Wikiprojects. I only came across the project in question when I came across 2 templates recently created for the project - 2 templates in which Wikipedia policy disallow so I have nommed them for deletion already. But before I nom this project for deletion, I'd like to hear opinions/thoughts/gripes. Thanks. - ALLST✰R▼ echo wuz here @ 07:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
Shouldn't there be some mention of non-article classes (Category, List, Template, Redirect, etc.) in the Assessment FAQ? — KCinDC ( talk) 16:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, all. As we know, the Version 1.0 Index stores assessments for over 1.7 million articles. Originally, the bot was designed to process about 10,000 articles; we never actually thought that 70% of Wikipedia was going to be covered under some sort of assessment. That has slowly caused the bot to take longer to run, as bot runs that used to last about four hours now take about four days. To make the bot more efficient, changes to the way the bot framework operates are being discussed, and simultaneously, we are discussing which features it might be worthwhile to add as we are recoding everything. We really would like to have your participation at User:WP 1.0 bot/Second generation and its talk page as we do this. Thanks, Titoxd( ?!? - cool stuff) 16:43, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I've been redesigning the San Francisco Bay Area project's page using Clockwork soul's various designs for Virus project etc. (my redesign is currently in my sandbox). I haven't filled out the participants list yet, but I also wanted to poll the participants list because I think many of them have gone inactive. I'm fine with manually entering the participants into the new participants list and then polling them to resign, but is there any recommended way of polling participants? - Optigan13 ( talk) 04:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
I think there should be a process similar to the proposal process to makeing a wikiproject inactive. Here Ford 20:25, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I see a lot of WikiProjects that have a section, usually at or near the top, like this:
==Title==
<Name of project>
Is there any need for such sections? Surely the title of the WikiProject is obvious from the title at the top, and from the rest of the page. Should we not systematically remove such sections, possibly with the help of a bot? Richard001 ( talk) 07:11, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
This project's name has come up on the talk page for Wikipedia:Coordinators, as a suggested alterntive to turning the coordinator page into a guideline. Input from this projects members on the matter would be apreciated. TomStar81 ( Talk) 09:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Ahh, I came here looking for my answer, and now, thanks to the recent debates, leave more confused than ever!
Is there any rule ANYWHERE that says articles that clearly fall into the scope of a descendant category can or can't be also tagged by the parent? I refer specifically to WP:MED and its descendants. There are articles like Abductor digiti minimi muscle (foot) that very clearly fall under WikiProject Anatomy, but are also tagged by WP:MED. Should they be? — Skittleys ( talk) 03:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Please see the ongoing discussion regarding the use of WikiProject banners on the talk pages of non-article pages. Thanks, – Black Falcon ( Talk) 23:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Please see the naming convention proposal. LA ( T) @ 21:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, i am part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels and am asking if any assistance can be provided to help with this Project since it is a major project on Wikipedia.
I will explain as best i can what has happened as there seem to some sudden change of activity for some unknown reason in regards to this Project. The project was running well under the Founder Kevinalewis. Then about 5 months ago a new member joined who claimed the Project was not been running correctly and requested a Election be held as they wished to become Project Leader and that he would then elect his own committee chosen by himself, of course this idea was not popular. A election was commenced and Kevinalewis decided to then state that he did not seek re-election and would rather someone else take over the position. After much debate in the nomination section, this new member would only answer with abusive remarks if questioned on what plans or experience he had to become the Project Leader. I did a check on this new member DangerTM and discovered he was actually a sockpuppet of Tom.mevlie who had tried to take over and disrupt other Projects, so he was removed as a candidate.
Yllosubmarine won the election, Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators and has been very active since. But after that we have had a dropping off of members who were responsible for such important features such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Outreach (if you look they are all inactive or have resigned) which handles the newsletter and no newsletter had been published now for almost 3 months. I did leave a message for the temporary editor Feydey but he has not responded even though he has contributed articles since then.
All i can think is that there has maybe been some lack of support for the new Project Leader who has suddenly found themselves without any help of Coordinators, Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators and that the Project is losing the interest of members. I have requsted to take over the newsletter, as i have contributed most of the tipline articles over the last year, to try and get it out each month again and to improve it so as to revitalise the Project and its members.
If there is anyone who can assist us in helping to get this Project back on track and advise us of what is needed, it be greatly appreciated, if they can leave a message for me. Too many Projects i have seen die and become inactive and i would hate to see this happen to this Project just because of a change of Leadership and disruption caused by that abusive sockpuppet. This Project is important to Wikipedia and should be continually becoming stronger rather than weakening. Regards Boylo ( talk) 03:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Proposal to merge need image categories of WikiProjects and reqphoto template categories. Do we really need to distinguish the difference between images and photographs? please see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Photography#Requests for Pictures, Images and Photographs --[unsigned]
Another editor and I are having a stylistic difference of opinion and I'd like some feedback on if there is - or should be - a manual of style, or other, guideline that addresses nesting project banners without using a bannershell. See Talk:Kinsey Reports, for instance. I believe the "nested=yes" parameter was designed for use with the banner shell but this has not won them over to using it. I find it a bit of an eyesore but they, of course see the banner shell as a bit of an eyesore so I'd like some other imput to see if there is already consensus on this or some ideas that may help resolve this. Any thoughts? Banjeboi 22:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
|nested=yes
setting should not be used straight onto a page, because it does not follow the convention used for all messageboxes (in all namespaces) of having 80% width.
(also)
Happy‑
melon 23:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)I think that clearly,
![]() | LGBT studies B‑class | ||||||
|
![]() | Sexology and sexuality B‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
|
Looks cleaner than:
![]() | LGBT studies B‑class | ||||||
|
![]() | Sexology and sexuality B‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
|
I understand that not everyone sees things the same way. Hence my trying to work a standard out the WP Sexuality, to get feedback from a wide variety of people rather than getting in a pissing contest.
Atom ( talk) 02:04, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A simpler option that uses less real estate on the screen is {{
WPB}}:
![]() | This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This has the advantage of not requiring someone to type in on every page. I find it particularly useful when there are more than three banners to hide on a talk page with many templates vying for attention. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 06:41, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
{{
WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes}}
is preferable; one day we'll finally get around to merging these two templates.
(also)
Happy‑
melon 08:38, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
{{
WPB|...}}
with {{
WPBS|collapsed=yes|...}}
and see how long it takes people to notice the difference. If we can get the banners to nest automatically inside banner shells then the two templates will be indistinguishable.
(also)
Happy‑
melon 10:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)I am having a lot of problems trying to find a bot that can deliver a newsletter for our Novels Project. There is a list of bots on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Newsletters but from looking at them, they seem all inactive and some have outstanding newsletters sitting still unsended for quite awhile. I have been moving the request to different bots to try and find one that is active but without success. If anyone has details of a active bot for newsletter deliveries can they post here. Boylo ( talk) 02:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Here are some others to check out. Category:Newsletter_delivery_bots Looks like User:MiszaBot may work. Atom ( talk) 03:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
An MfD needs your expertise. Please consider commenting at Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Red_Faction. Thanks. -- Suntag ( talk) 02:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Label | Criteria | Reader's experience | Editing suggestions | Example | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() {{ FA-Class}} |
The article has attained
Featured article status.
|
Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information. | No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. |
Tourette Syndrome (as of June 2008) | ||||
![]() {{ FL-Class}} |
The article has attained
Featured list status.
|
FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives (as of January 2008) | ||||||
![]() {{ A-Class}} |
The article is well organized and is essentially complete, having been reviewed by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere, as described
here.
|
Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. | Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style issues may need addressing. Peer-review may help. |
Durian (as of March 2007) | ||||
![]() {{ GA-Class}} |
The article has attained
Good article status.
|
Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (although not equalling) the quality of a professional encyclopedia. | Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing. |
International Space Station (as of February 2007) | ||||
B {{ B-Class}} |
The article is mostly complete and without major issues, but requires some further work to reach
Good Article standards. B-Class articles should meet the
six B-Class criteria:
|
No reader should be left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher. | A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed, and expert knowledge is increasingly needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should also be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the manual of style and related style guidelines. |
Jammu and Kashmir (as of October 2007) | ||||
C {{ C-Class}} |
The article is substantial, but is still missing important content or contains a lot of irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant issues or require substantial
cleanup.
|
Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study. | Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and address cleanup issues. |
Exeter Cathedral (as of June 2008) | ||||
Start {{ Start-Class}} |
An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources.
|
Provides some meaningful content, but the majority of readers will need more. | Provision of references to reliable sources should be prioritised; the article will also need substantial improvements in content and organisation. |
Real analysis (as of November 2006) | ||||
Stub {{ Stub-Class}} |
A very basic description of the topic.
|
Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition | Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. |
Coffee table book (as of July 2005) |
As you can see from this, almost all grades are added on what type of article it is or the quality of the article. However, a major grade list missing that has been added to the assessment - List-rated articles, obviously articles that are lists. So shouldn't this be added? If so, what should be put? Simply south ( talk) 22:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Can someone point me to a page on how to merge two projects? I haven't been able to find one. Thanks and regards. -- Klein zach 06:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Recent code updates have made it possible to significantly improve the handling of WikiProject banner nesting, deprecating the |nested=yes
system. See
Template talk:WikiProjectBannerShell#New implementation of WikiProject banners for more details.
Happy‑
melon 19:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
I have just added a new entry to the WikiProject automation directory: ArticleAlertbot can notify projects when their articles are nominated for AfD, as featured article candidates, for RFC, and more of such workflows. This could for example enhance the sorting of deletion debates considerably. See User:B. Wolterding/Article alerts for more information. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 21:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
In order to help facilitate easier location of potential sources of offline information to help verify the notability of article subjects and contents, I have created Category:WikiProject reference libraries and placed into it all of the reference library pages of which I am aware. Please add more project reference libraries to this category if you know of more. Additionally, feel free to create new reference library pages for any particular project as well. They can be very useful. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I've noticed a problem with our project template, Template:WikiProject Psychology, that I would like to get some advice on. There is a link to a "Comments" subpage that should be used for comments relating to the rating of the article. However, novice users seem to sometimes be confused by this, every now and then I see comments that should have been placed on the Talk page for the article instead being placed on the "/Comments" page, with the effect of the comments going unnoticed. I would like to know if other projects have had or have this problem, and how they have dealt with it. (also see discussion here) / skagedal talk 09:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Is there any precedent, procedure, or guideliens to follow if we want to turn an inactive WikiProject into taskforces of another WikiProject? There's a lot of WikiProjects devoted to musical groups that couldn't sustain themselves, and we over at WP:ALM were discussing turning some of the more useful ones that fall under our scope into taskforces. WesleyDodds ( talk) 08:57, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
The discussion on the implementation of a 'trial' configuration of FlaggedRevisions on en.wiki has now reached the 'straw poll' stage. All editors are invited to read the proposal and discussion and to participate in the straw poll. Happy‑ melon 18:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
I have requested for a bot to manage WikiProject contests. See Wikipedia:Bot_requests#Bot_to_run_WikiProject_contests. Please provide your input on the bot request page. Thanks, Ganeshk ( talk) 07:25, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I have requested a bot to create project watchlists here. As you can see, a user kindly did a generation of pages for the projects I named, but I think we need an automated bot for this run by members of the WikiProject Council. I expand upon this in the WPCouncil Guide talk. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:41, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
This may have been discussed before but I am not up to wading through the archives.
I started working on the articles in Category:Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts and I am resolving the non-trivial conflicts. (There are conflicts on two js pages and conflicts occur in Sandboxes. I am leaving them alone.) There appear to be two major causes for conflict.
The most common cause is that some project banners, most notably Biography and Greece, use the listas parameter whether it is there or not. If the parameter is not completed the sort value is reset to the PAGENAME. This causes a conflict when one banner has a completed listas and another does not.
The second cause for conflict is when the DEFAULTSORT template is placed on the page. As I understand it the DEFAULTSORT template is only to be used on the article page not on the discussion page but some well-meaning editors have been putting it on the discussion page, possibly because they have found the article has been sorted incorrectly in some list. Often the DEFAULTSORT value is incorrect. (For "Janet Montgomerie, Countess of Eglinton" the DEFAULTSORT was "Eglinton, Janet Montgomerie, Countess of". I kid you not.)
Could this Council reach a consensus among all the projects that when a Project Banner is applied the listas parameter is completed? While you are at it, could there also be a consensus that all templates will have the nested parameter set to yes? There has been concern expressed about the appearance of the talk pages of those article that are in many categories. Some projects banners will contract automatically if nested is set to yes. Others need to be enclosed in the WikiProjectBanners template or the WikiProjectBannerShell template. The former does a much better job of contracting the banners but a couple of banners ignore it and insist upon the latter.
I think that implementing the above will make life much easier for casual users and for editors who are working at making things better.
Thank you.
I think you understand correctly. As far as I can see you have both overstated and understated the case of "something bad happens.
Listas
Most often a mildly instrusive error message will appear on the page above the offending tag, if the tags have been nested the offending tag is no longer nested and the Talk Page is listed on
Category:Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts. If this were the worst that happened, this problem belongs in the bottom 100 of things to be addressed.
Sometimes, see the 09:56, 25 July 2008, version of Talk:Dimitrios Gounaris, where the Biobraphy tag had the correct listas value and the Greece tag had no listas value, the offending banner explodes. The Greece banner is the only one that I have seen explode so far and I think it only happens under very limited conditions, but the fact that it happens at all should be enough to move the problem much higher on the list of things to be addressed and the folks in the Greece project will be screaming bloody murder to get the problem fixed immediately once a few of them notice it.
Yes, I do want every tag to have a valid listas value. I do not think that it is impossible for a project to ever have a person in it and if the project completes the listas parameter for that one person it is not left for some one else to fix. Also, it is not only people that need a listas parameter.
Nesting
I merely think that nested tags look better than those that are not nested. I think that most users go to the Talk page to look at the discussions. The project listing may be interesting to them but it is certainly not important. A member of a project who is looking at the Talk Page of an article already knows that the article is part of the Project but may want to update information in the banner. The information cannot be seen easily without editing the page but the member has to edit the page anyway.
{{ WPBS}} and automatic nesting are just fine for articles that are in a few projects. When a simple list of the projects fills a screen I think it is time for {{ WPB}}. There are articles in the Biography, Greece, Italy, MilHist and Middle Ages projects, some of those are in other countries' projects as well. There are articles in Biography, MilHist and US Congress projects plus at least one US State project and at least one City project. Irish Politicians and Irish Unionists enjoy similar popularity.
I realize that well-behaved banners will automatically nest if placed within {{ WPBS}}. However, many templates are not well-behaved. If all the templates were well-behaved {{ WPBS}} would not be necessary because nested=yes would accomplish the same thing.
I think that nesting is an important issue mainly for those who care about how things look and how things should look and that if you ask twelve people what they think, you will get at least thirteen opinions. The listas issue affects accessiblity to information and I believe ease of accessibility should the underlying "pillar" to almost every web site, most especially WP.
Did that help?
JimCubb ( talk) 19:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
|listas=
issue that you bring up is certainly a well-known and serious problem. The issue is multi-levelled as you say. The issue that DEFAULTSORT is intended to resolve is where pages like
Talk:Albert Einstein are listed under "A" instead of "E"; pages like
Talk:Water should not need a DEFAULTSORT because sorting under "W" is entirely correct here. What actually happens, unfortunately, is that both these pages will in the absence of any correcting factors categorise under "T", because for some reason no one can fathom the namespace prefix is included. There is an active bug (
T18552) open to resolve this; if you have a Bugzilla account I strongly encourage you to go and vote for that bug to get it implemented ASAP. When that happens, pages like
Talk:Water will not need any category-sorting treatment; they can be left in their 'natural state'. The fact that such pages hugely outnumber pages where there is a legitimate use for DEFAULTSORTs indicates that it is counterproductive to simply require |listas=
parameters on all banners. Rather, it will be easy and effective to reconfigure all banners to only define a DEFAULTSORT if a value is explicitly given through |listas=
. That way, the only DEFAULTSORT conflicts that will occur is when two banners on a page specify different DEFAULTSORT sortkeys, which is very easy to fix by removing one of them or changing them to both be the same. While it would be a good idea for every WikiProject banner to support a |listas=
parameter (so that adding a DEFAULTSORT can be done by editing the first banner on a page, whichever project that might be), requiring every listas parameter to be set (when they would all need to be the same and might be duplicated ten or more times on popular pages), is totally unnecessary.{{
WikiProjectBanners}}
template is itself deprecated; the functionality that you suggest is available by calling {{
WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes}}
. You have two contradictory definitions of "well-behaved": the well behaved banners are the ones that adapt automatically to the presence of a banner shell. WikiProject Banners should not be nested outside WPB or WPBS because the resulting appearance is against the guidelines at
WP:TPT. Whenever there are more than three WikiProject banners on a page, a WPBS shell should be introduced. If there are more than 8 or 9 banners, consider adding |collapsed=yes
to the banner shell. In no circumstances should it be necessary to collapse banners without a shell, or to use WPB.{{
WPBS|collapsed=yes}}
(or {{
WPBS|collapsed=yes|banner collapse=no}}
if you want to precisely duplicate WPB) retains those styles while still taking advantage of the superior features of the other banner. So, by no means are the WPB styles deprecated; sorry if I gave that impression.
Happy‑
melon 10:42, 9 January 2009 (UTC)Unfortunately, it does. It is so much easier to type a pipe and "nested=yes" once, copy them and past them a couple of times than it is to type two left braces, "WPBS|1=", scroll to the end of the tags and type two right braces. Visually, they are identical. It is also much, much easier to use WPB than to type all that stuff to make WPBS do the same thing.
I could not find where WP:TPT said that banners cannot be nested outside WPB or WPBS. I had a brief giggle, though, at the example given there. Not only is WPB used but each of the banners has the value for nested set at yes, even the WP Biography banner which doesn't need it to behave correctly within a shell. (None of the banners have a completed listas parameter but no one has put a DEFAULTSORT on the page either. I think the latter will happen eventually.)
The giggle at the Pope's Talk page was preceeded by one at the conflict I had just resolved. There are three banners on the page. Biography was first, followed by MilHist and I do not remember the third. There was no shell of either kind but all three has nested=yes. The MilHist banner did not cooperate but the other two did. I used WPBS and took "nested=yes" off of all the banners. The MilHist banner did not nest but the other two did. I put "nested=yes" back into MilHist and it behaved. Do you suppose there is some correlation between the name of the project and the way its banner behaves?
I do not think the current version of Talk:Hiero I of Syracuse is at all funny. Six projects, only the first two are in the banner shell and pieces of the Greece banner are all over the place. It is beyond ugly. Had I seen something like it when I first started doing this I would have wanted to run away and hide. Now I know that copy and paste or cut and paste will solve all the problems.
JimCubb ( talk) 22:19, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
|nested=yes
:D.
|nested=
parameter and so are more in line with
WP:TPT. The reason WPBS did not work as you expected it to on
Talk:Hiero I of Syracuse was because of a simple (although easy to make) formatting error
[1].
Happy‑
melon 22:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)|nested=yes
to each banner, while you only need to add the wrapper template once. So it's considerably more than eleven characters.
Happy‑
melon 10:44, 9 January 2009 (UTC)I have found that some banners will obey WPB and WPBS only if nested=yes. Rather than try to remember which ones they are I paste "nested=yes" into every banner on my way down to typing the two right braces at the end. I do the same for the listas parameter.
I will always use WPB for living people. The living=yes in the WPBiog banner does not produce the BLP banner if the WPBiog banner is nested and |blp=yes does not seem to work unless it is in a shell.
One other thing that I am doing with living people is to make certain the BLP banner is on top of the list. I have observed that the folks who care about the sensitivity of BLP really care about it. In the interest of self-preservation I think it wise to stay on their good sides.
I have created an SVG of the logo for you guys to use, if you want to. Any suggestions or queries, please ask them here, but please drop me a note at my talk too, as I don't have this page watchlisted (tend not to use it much). — neuro (talk) 12:16, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Again, this may be in the archives and I promise that as soon as I have an afternoon with absolutely nothing else to do I will read the archives but Is there a suggested order for Project banners on a page?
I assume that the Talk banner should be on top, even though it is huge, and if the article is about a living person the blp banner should be as close to the to as possible but what comes next? Does it matter?
{{
skiptotoc}}
(or variants) for obvious reasons, then {{
Talk header}}
, then {{
blp}}
in whatever incarnation it takes (from {{
WPBiography}}
, {{
WPBS}}
or on its own on rare occasions; this requirement can fix the position of other templates, as {{
WPBS}}
and {{
ArticleHistory}}
are usually placed adjacent to each other. It's also customary that {{
archive box}}
goes at the bottom of the stack. Other than these, there really aren't any conventions, especially when there is no shell template on a page (although WikiProject banners are usually placed together).
Happy‑
melon 17:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Cool! I have been moving {{
WPBiography}}
to the top when it provided the blp banner unless I saw a reason not to do so. When I did not move it I have used {{
blp}}
. I stopped trying to follow a hierarchy, such as general to specific, when I realized that almost nobody cared. Thank you.
About two years ago someone had the bright idea that the list of categories at the bottom of an artcle was too big and some of those categories should be moved to the Talk page. Within the last couple of months a bot has started to do that. As a result, the top of the Talk page is becoming more cluttered and the category listing at the bottom of the Talk page is getting longer. Some projects have already made their banner-generated categories hidden, that is, they do not show on the the page that generates them. Could the basic banner and all project banners be modified so that their administrative categories are hidden?
It does no one any good to see at the bottom of a talk page that the article is an "Unknown-priority biography (sports and games) article". If one cares about such things the list of banner-generated categories at the Project page is where it should be found. There should be a way to put at the bottom of a page that a page belongs to a number of categories that are not visible with a link to instructions on how to see the hidden categories.
I am going to make this suggestion to the Biography project as that project covers at least 20% of the pages in Wikipedia.
For anyone who is interested, Derek Andrews has created Template:No selected item which can be used as a warning for selecting items such as selected article and selected picture not being displayed the next month. Simply south is this a buffet? 21:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
{{
portalwarning}}
as used by
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports and others.
Nanonic (
talk) 22:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)I'm managing WikiProject Neuroscience currently, and one thing that's very clear is that hardly anybody ever looks at our portal, Portal:Neuroscience, which gives not much motivation for maintaining it. What needs to be done is to increase the visibility of portal links from the basic articles on the topic, such as Neuroscience and Brain. I can think of several ways to do it, but all of them have problems. The ideal would be to have the portal link on the title line, at the upper right, but as far as I know that isn't possible. Putting it at the upper right of the lead gives a really ugly appearance if there is an image in the lead -- and putting it below the image makes it too hard to notice. I'm tempted to put it at the upper left of the lead, but that seems too obtrusive. Any suggestions? If this has been discussed before, a pointer to the previous discussion would be appreciated. Looie496 ( talk) 17:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
I recall discussion of a bot that could remove inactive members from a project, but I can't recall where the discussion was. Anyone have any clues? Hiding T 12:06, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Wondering if any experienced WikiProject people would like to help us get Wikipedia:WikiProject Blogging on its feet. Computerjoe 's talk 19:46, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I wasn't sure where to post this, so I'll try here. My proposal is for an alternative wikiproject directory that is more compact and will shorten the number of hops required to reach a particular project. Here is an example for your consideration:
Science · Aviation · Biology · Chemistry · Computing · Economics · Geosciences · Health and fitness · Information science · Mathematics · Meteorology · Physics · Space · Technology · Time
Thank you.— RJH ( talk) 19:43, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
That looks good. I think a similar thing is needed for the proposals. Rd232 talk 12:10, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
A proposal to change the structure of the project proposal page has been elaborated here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Subpage idea. It would, AFD-style, give each proposal its own subpage. Comments please. Rd232 talk 12:00, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Creating a proposal
This box is to propose WikiProjects or Task forces that you wish to create. Please make sure you have read the relevent guides that are listed below: Create a new subpage by typing in the name of the proposed WikiProject/Task Force in the input box below (after "/Proposals/") and clicking "create page." Then, follow the instructions at the top of the page to add a description of the proposed project: If there is already a proposal there with the same name as your project (you can tell because there should be no hidden messages, and a proper signature instead of ~~~~), either change the name of the project or add your name to the list of supporters. |
I suggest if no opposition has been voiced by 5 April (a week from when it was first mentioned, plus a bit), you go ahead and do it. It's a big improvement. Rd232 talk 15:57, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I believe the "SWPP" section should be removed. Please reply here. ~EdGl ★ 17:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I recently joined the wikiproject Aquarium fishes, only to find that no one had posted in it since january. Is there any way to take control of this wikiproject and save the work that has already been done while removing inactive members, and moving control of newsletters and such to someone else? Drew R. Smith ( talk) 13:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Try as I might, I can't seem to find the answer: once a project proposal attracts sufficient members, how do you actually create a new project namespace on (Wikipedia:Wikiproject....)? Thanks. Tobit2 ( talk) 23:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Question answered. Create like any other page. Just type in Wikipedia:WikiProject (project name). Tobit2 ( talk)
It appears that several California related WikiProjects have become dead, or have limited activity. I've started task force conversion discussions for several daughter projects. I'm a bit concerned that I might be running a bit past being bold and if I need some clue adjustment. The discussions are all linked from WT:CAL so any advice, suggestions, or clue adjustment would be appreciated. - Optigan13 ( talk) 06:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject VVMAP seems to be the creation (in October 2008) of its only active member, Cooljuno411 ( talk · contribs). I've yet to see any articles tagged with the project or any visible work on behalf of this project. It was kept via Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject VVMAP in the same month and year. I feel it's a dead or useless project but wanted to get input from more seasoned editors in regards to Wikiprojects. I only came across the project in question when I came across 2 templates recently created for the project - 2 templates in which Wikipedia policy disallow so I have nommed them for deletion already. But before I nom this project for deletion, I'd like to hear opinions/thoughts/gripes. Thanks. - ALLST✰R▼ echo wuz here @ 07:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)