Main page | Discussion page | Sub-pages index |
Article Alerts | Assessment | Review | Collaboration | Task Forces | Outreach | Members | Popular pages |
WikiProject Announcements
| ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Please be sure to check the section for "Article Alerts" at
Wikipedia:WikiProject History#Article Alerts, for useful automated updates on various articles that pertain to topics within history. To watch the page for Article Alerts, please add this page to your watchlist: Wikipedia:WikiProject History/Article alerts |
History Project‑class | |||||||
|
WikiProject History was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 19 March 2014. |
WikiProject History was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 19 November 2007. |
This page has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Hi everyone. I am writing to ask for any volunteers who might like to get more involved here at WikiProject History. Right now, we would like to get WikiProject History up and running again. A number of people have signed up in the past, and indicated their willingness to be involved. If you're still here, feel free to reply here. You can reply here in this section, even if it's just to say hello. If you want, you can simply let me know what you are personally working on right now. or also, if you want, you can let me know what your interests are, what topics you find interesting, what you;d like to do, or how you'd like to be involved. whatever it may be, we'd like to hear from you. we appreciate it. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 14:55, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
In a few months there will be an LGBT+ Wiki conference as described at meta:Queering Wikipedia. This will be the first global gathering of LGBT+ Wikipedia editors to develop LGBT+ content.
Telling the story of the history of the LGBT+ movement is a challenge. We have cultural diversity, as every culture has an LGBT+ history with events. We also have many time periods to cover, as over the centuries, some cultures had more or less activity with records to mention. There is no canon of most popular or recommended events or topics in LGBT+ global history.
As with all Wikipedia development projects we have limited volunteer labor. There are thousands of English language topics, but if the goal is to promote global education and culture, then we should focus on a subset of these articles and stage that subset for translation. I guessed that 100 articles would be a good number, and documented this concept at meta:Wiki99.
Here is my question for WikiProject History: suppose that a group wants to promote global multilingual education in a field, and that group decides to develop about 100 Wikipedia articles in that field for translation and cultural exchange. How should we determine the weight of how many of those articles should be from one country, and from what time period?
Some cases where people have asked about this are religion, architecture, science, women's history, medicine, and other similar broad fields which have their own regional and global culture and history. Any brief thoughts? Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:50, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
"barriers"which seems needlessly hostile and would otherwise be considered a personal attack. That said, I think that the content developed should be driven by available source material, not arbitrary quotas. While English-language articles can be translated with their English-language citations to other wikis, compliance with WP:V as it exists in other wikis is best accomplished locally with source material from those languages. I would hope translators would be searching for those en-wp articles that are also supported in the target language's literature thereby enabling editors in other languages to discover sources they can read directly rather than reply upon machine translation. There's also a neo-Colonial edge to the project which I find problematic. Shouldn't we let the foreign-language readership determine which articles they desire rather than have articles chosen by first-world editors? I would start in the target-language wikis looking for requested articles and preponderant red links. Our biases as editors shouldn't determine what happens outside our home wiki under the guise of "diversity." Chris Troutman ( talk) 17:24, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm going to side-step the LGBTQ topic, & address the more general issue: where should we encourage article development between Wikipedias of different languages? My answer is that we should encourage articles in a given Wikipedia to give preference to sources in its native language. That is, German Wikipedia articles should prefer sources in German, Russian Wikipedia articles in Russian, etc. I base my answer on finding far too often that instead of researching a given topic -- which means the author will look at materials in their own native language -- the equivalent English Wikipedia article is translated without concern about its quality. I first noticed this problem several years ago when I was working on articles about the Empire of Trebizond, where the most recent work has been published in Modern Greek & Russian. When I looked at the corresponding articles in those languages -- hoping to save myself some time finding & translating sources -- I was surprised to find these articles were translations of the en.wikipedia articles, which at the time was based on a book written in 1926! (Even more depressing was the fact that when I looked at corresponding articles in other language Wikipedias, every one was a translation of the same en.wikipedia article, with little attempt to expand on the material!)
I don't know if this answers your question, Bluerasberry, but I feel if speakers of non-English languages were a little more chauvinistic about their mother tongues, Wikipedia as a whole would be stronger in every topic. -- llywrch ( talk) 19:27, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
I gave a go at compiling ~99 articles as an attempt at a canon of world history.
Suppose that we imagine a class of educated people who receive a bachelor's degree or equivalent from a university and who have some liberal arts training. This class of people intends to participate in the globalized workforce, with many individuals having a career which includes international collaboration with at least one foreign culture and the collective cohort including individuals who collaborate with every major culture on earth. What 100 topics are useful for such people to know globally? Are there topics which we should expect 95%+ of all such people to know?
For example, can a person be university educated, and traveling around the world doing business or work projects, and participate fully in society if they are completely ignorant that certain classical civilizations ever existed, or that there was a time of colonization, and an age of slavery, and international relations through history? In compiling this list, I attempted to choose topics which both are part of multiple cultures' histories, and which represent most people on earth the most often, and which track the chain of progress through history.
It is not easy to compile lists of this sort and I am sure many people could criticize it. If anyone has criticism, then I would especially like feedback on who has also compiled such a list, if anyone can identify any such similar project for global translation of a canon, and how anyone balanced the representation of the list.
Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:00, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
hey @ Bluerasberry:, @ Llywrch:, here's a little template that I made up. do you like this? this is my first time at playing around with templates. just thought it'd be nice to work on. feel free to let me know what you think. maybe this might be helpful occasionally, now and then. thanks!!!!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 08:05, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
@ Sm8900: Talking about principles like this is not usually a part of WikiProject discussion, but if you have interest in this, and you can rally WikiProject contributors to engage with such things, then we are in a strange and appropriate time right now to seek community comment.
Regarding what you wrote, all of this is still part of Wikipedia best practices and I still agree with all of it. These are all great things to say and can inspire people. These are the best we have now, and I am not sure what comes next, but it happens that in a few days there will be a major publication recommending Wikimedia Movement best practices and changes.
If you are interested in strategy and statements of purpose, then I encourage you to watch meta:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations from 20 January 2020 and to comment on it within 5 weeks. This strategy discussion has been in process for 4 years and this is the last phase for comment before the next phase of the process, which is implementation of the recommendations. Many people are anxious about this short comment period, which came to be because of past delays and already planned future deadlines which should not move. If you find an angle in the strategic planning to advocate for the interests of the many history WikiProjects in many languages, then please speak out in comment on the meta page after 20 January and encourage others to do the same.
This is part of a transition. Jimbo had some guiding ideas in the beginning but he has regularly divested responsibility and advocated for more Wikimedia community leadership and control over the movement. If WikiProject history found it meaningful to do so, as a community you could set your own goals and principles, perhaps in the context of these recommendations. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:15, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Bumping thread for 3560 days. Keeping this section here, as a general resource for new member intros and comments. thanks! . Sm8900 ( talk) 15:50, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
The Skateboarding Digital History Project (SBDHP), founded in 2018 by wil540, is a research and publishing initiative promoting the digitization of skateboarding history. The goal of the SBDHP is to create and promote the creation of accessible skateboard history online. The project currently focuses on writing wikipedia articles for notable skateboarders and skateboard related items; as well as, leading skateboarding themed edit-a-thons. In October 2019, the Skateboarding Digital History Project and Wikipedia for Educators at Fordham hosted its first edit-a-thon, a Latinx-American Skateboarding themed edit-a-thon, that took place in the Bronx, New York. Articles for Jaime Reyes & Ben Sanchez were written at this edit-a-thon.
Goals for the future
Please reach out with any questions, comments, or suggestions on the talk page or you can email us at: skateboardingDHP@gmail.com.
Follow the SBDHP on instagram at: https://www.instagram.com/sbdhp/
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Note by Lead Coordinator:
Please see this discussion regarding what to do about a botched merge at Monarchism in France. Thanks,
The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—will take place this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24.
If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
The articles early modern period, modern era and late modern period cover very similar topics, but all are in a very bad state. All three are trying to simultaneously cover the periodization of (mostly) Europe-centered history and covering virtually all history within the timeframe of about 1500 until today, including the history of regions that aren't actually included in the concept of post-medieval history and modernity. The latter article is also quite a mess that confuses the idea of modernity with the historical period.
There's also the glaring problem that "late modern period" is what most historians describe as the "modern period". The concept of the modern era encompassing the entirety of post-medieval history pre-dates the concept of the "early modern". Other than Wikipedia, I've never seen historical works that describe the period of 1800 to today as "late modern", and the article late modern period doesn't actually have any references supporting the use of the term.
All of these articles need some serious attention because as they are right now, they are mostly just coatracks for any and all historical events that happen to have occurred between 1500 and today, regardless if they are relevant to the concept of periodization relating to modernity. All three articles need to be seriously overhauled based on sources that focus on the periods as a whole, not just any random source that happen to include "modern" in the title. Peter Isotalo 21:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
If no reliable independent sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it.Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 20:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
FYI portal:World War II has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.247.66 ( talk) 06:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
History of The Simpsons has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 11:39, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Dear WikiProject History Enthusiasts,
I'm reaching out to this knowledgeable community with a fascinating challenge and opportunity: the Portal Fernández Concha article. This isn't just any building; it's a portal (pun intended) to a rich tapestry of historical events, societal changes, and noteworthy moments that have left indelible marks on the cultural and historical landscape.
Why Your Expertise is Crucial:
What I'm Hoping for From This Collaboration:
This is more than just a call for edits; it's an invitation to be part of a collaborative effort to craft a piece of historical scholarship that will inform and engage readers for years to come. I believe that together, we can bring the rich history of Portal Fernández Concha to life in a way that honors its past and enlightens its future.
Thank you for considering this collaboration. I eagerly await your insights, contributions, and the rich historical tapestry we can weave together.
Best regards, TraceySear840 ( talk) 18:11, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Catholic Church has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 ( talk) 17:28, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
There is a split discussion at Talk:History of the United States (1789–1849)#Proposal to split (1789–1815) and (1815–1849). Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 06:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mughal–Maratha Wars#Requested move 8 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Imperial [AFCND] 14:25, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Indian campaigns of Muhammad of Ghor#Requested move 11 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Imperial [AFCND] 14:27, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:History of encyclopedias#Requested move 29 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 08:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Despite the consensus seeming to be in favour of keeping "internment" as the title of Internment of Japanese Americans, the article's text now solely uses the term "incarceration". Consistency between the two would be preferred, especially since the change to the article's text seems to have been made recently without discussion. Eldomtom2 ( talk) 13:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Dear All,
Please check urgently this post on reddit detailing how a few Hungarian editors are systematically rewriting articles on Romanian history. It needs intervention and professional editors to correct the changes. I also posted about this in the Administrators' noticeboard, please, contribute there. Adam Harangozó ( talk) 07:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:History of the Jews in Taiwan#Requested move 25 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 14:50, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
User:Buidhe has nominated Unification of Germany for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi, need your help. There's discussion regarding what to call result in Polish-Ukrainian conflict in 1940s. Partially discussion took place here as well. Dƶoxar ( talk) 11:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Would like editor's thoughts on this claim:
Discussion here:
-- David Tornheim ( talk) 07:28, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
I have set up Category:decade overviews as a set of categories, as well as articles, and navboxes, as part of WikiProject History Contemporary History task force, which I chair.
Please feel free to contact me any time, with any comments, ideas or questions. thanks! Sm8900 ( talk) 14:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kaunas Fortress has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Weaponization of antisemitism#Requested move 21 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 ( talk) 02:07, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Main page | Discussion page | Sub-pages index |
Article Alerts | Assessment | Review | Collaboration | Task Forces | Outreach | Members | Popular pages |
WikiProject Announcements
| ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Please be sure to check the section for "Article Alerts" at
Wikipedia:WikiProject History#Article Alerts, for useful automated updates on various articles that pertain to topics within history. To watch the page for Article Alerts, please add this page to your watchlist: Wikipedia:WikiProject History/Article alerts |
History Project‑class | |||||||
|
WikiProject History was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 19 March 2014. |
WikiProject History was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 19 November 2007. |
This page has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Hi everyone. I am writing to ask for any volunteers who might like to get more involved here at WikiProject History. Right now, we would like to get WikiProject History up and running again. A number of people have signed up in the past, and indicated their willingness to be involved. If you're still here, feel free to reply here. You can reply here in this section, even if it's just to say hello. If you want, you can simply let me know what you are personally working on right now. or also, if you want, you can let me know what your interests are, what topics you find interesting, what you;d like to do, or how you'd like to be involved. whatever it may be, we'd like to hear from you. we appreciate it. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 14:55, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
In a few months there will be an LGBT+ Wiki conference as described at meta:Queering Wikipedia. This will be the first global gathering of LGBT+ Wikipedia editors to develop LGBT+ content.
Telling the story of the history of the LGBT+ movement is a challenge. We have cultural diversity, as every culture has an LGBT+ history with events. We also have many time periods to cover, as over the centuries, some cultures had more or less activity with records to mention. There is no canon of most popular or recommended events or topics in LGBT+ global history.
As with all Wikipedia development projects we have limited volunteer labor. There are thousands of English language topics, but if the goal is to promote global education and culture, then we should focus on a subset of these articles and stage that subset for translation. I guessed that 100 articles would be a good number, and documented this concept at meta:Wiki99.
Here is my question for WikiProject History: suppose that a group wants to promote global multilingual education in a field, and that group decides to develop about 100 Wikipedia articles in that field for translation and cultural exchange. How should we determine the weight of how many of those articles should be from one country, and from what time period?
Some cases where people have asked about this are religion, architecture, science, women's history, medicine, and other similar broad fields which have their own regional and global culture and history. Any brief thoughts? Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:50, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
"barriers"which seems needlessly hostile and would otherwise be considered a personal attack. That said, I think that the content developed should be driven by available source material, not arbitrary quotas. While English-language articles can be translated with their English-language citations to other wikis, compliance with WP:V as it exists in other wikis is best accomplished locally with source material from those languages. I would hope translators would be searching for those en-wp articles that are also supported in the target language's literature thereby enabling editors in other languages to discover sources they can read directly rather than reply upon machine translation. There's also a neo-Colonial edge to the project which I find problematic. Shouldn't we let the foreign-language readership determine which articles they desire rather than have articles chosen by first-world editors? I would start in the target-language wikis looking for requested articles and preponderant red links. Our biases as editors shouldn't determine what happens outside our home wiki under the guise of "diversity." Chris Troutman ( talk) 17:24, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm going to side-step the LGBTQ topic, & address the more general issue: where should we encourage article development between Wikipedias of different languages? My answer is that we should encourage articles in a given Wikipedia to give preference to sources in its native language. That is, German Wikipedia articles should prefer sources in German, Russian Wikipedia articles in Russian, etc. I base my answer on finding far too often that instead of researching a given topic -- which means the author will look at materials in their own native language -- the equivalent English Wikipedia article is translated without concern about its quality. I first noticed this problem several years ago when I was working on articles about the Empire of Trebizond, where the most recent work has been published in Modern Greek & Russian. When I looked at the corresponding articles in those languages -- hoping to save myself some time finding & translating sources -- I was surprised to find these articles were translations of the en.wikipedia articles, which at the time was based on a book written in 1926! (Even more depressing was the fact that when I looked at corresponding articles in other language Wikipedias, every one was a translation of the same en.wikipedia article, with little attempt to expand on the material!)
I don't know if this answers your question, Bluerasberry, but I feel if speakers of non-English languages were a little more chauvinistic about their mother tongues, Wikipedia as a whole would be stronger in every topic. -- llywrch ( talk) 19:27, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
I gave a go at compiling ~99 articles as an attempt at a canon of world history.
Suppose that we imagine a class of educated people who receive a bachelor's degree or equivalent from a university and who have some liberal arts training. This class of people intends to participate in the globalized workforce, with many individuals having a career which includes international collaboration with at least one foreign culture and the collective cohort including individuals who collaborate with every major culture on earth. What 100 topics are useful for such people to know globally? Are there topics which we should expect 95%+ of all such people to know?
For example, can a person be university educated, and traveling around the world doing business or work projects, and participate fully in society if they are completely ignorant that certain classical civilizations ever existed, or that there was a time of colonization, and an age of slavery, and international relations through history? In compiling this list, I attempted to choose topics which both are part of multiple cultures' histories, and which represent most people on earth the most often, and which track the chain of progress through history.
It is not easy to compile lists of this sort and I am sure many people could criticize it. If anyone has criticism, then I would especially like feedback on who has also compiled such a list, if anyone can identify any such similar project for global translation of a canon, and how anyone balanced the representation of the list.
Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:00, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
hey @ Bluerasberry:, @ Llywrch:, here's a little template that I made up. do you like this? this is my first time at playing around with templates. just thought it'd be nice to work on. feel free to let me know what you think. maybe this might be helpful occasionally, now and then. thanks!!!!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 08:05, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
@ Sm8900: Talking about principles like this is not usually a part of WikiProject discussion, but if you have interest in this, and you can rally WikiProject contributors to engage with such things, then we are in a strange and appropriate time right now to seek community comment.
Regarding what you wrote, all of this is still part of Wikipedia best practices and I still agree with all of it. These are all great things to say and can inspire people. These are the best we have now, and I am not sure what comes next, but it happens that in a few days there will be a major publication recommending Wikimedia Movement best practices and changes.
If you are interested in strategy and statements of purpose, then I encourage you to watch meta:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations from 20 January 2020 and to comment on it within 5 weeks. This strategy discussion has been in process for 4 years and this is the last phase for comment before the next phase of the process, which is implementation of the recommendations. Many people are anxious about this short comment period, which came to be because of past delays and already planned future deadlines which should not move. If you find an angle in the strategic planning to advocate for the interests of the many history WikiProjects in many languages, then please speak out in comment on the meta page after 20 January and encourage others to do the same.
This is part of a transition. Jimbo had some guiding ideas in the beginning but he has regularly divested responsibility and advocated for more Wikimedia community leadership and control over the movement. If WikiProject history found it meaningful to do so, as a community you could set your own goals and principles, perhaps in the context of these recommendations. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:15, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Bumping thread for 3560 days. Keeping this section here, as a general resource for new member intros and comments. thanks! . Sm8900 ( talk) 15:50, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
The Skateboarding Digital History Project (SBDHP), founded in 2018 by wil540, is a research and publishing initiative promoting the digitization of skateboarding history. The goal of the SBDHP is to create and promote the creation of accessible skateboard history online. The project currently focuses on writing wikipedia articles for notable skateboarders and skateboard related items; as well as, leading skateboarding themed edit-a-thons. In October 2019, the Skateboarding Digital History Project and Wikipedia for Educators at Fordham hosted its first edit-a-thon, a Latinx-American Skateboarding themed edit-a-thon, that took place in the Bronx, New York. Articles for Jaime Reyes & Ben Sanchez were written at this edit-a-thon.
Goals for the future
Please reach out with any questions, comments, or suggestions on the talk page or you can email us at: skateboardingDHP@gmail.com.
Follow the SBDHP on instagram at: https://www.instagram.com/sbdhp/
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Note by Lead Coordinator:
Please see this discussion regarding what to do about a botched merge at Monarchism in France. Thanks,
The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—will take place this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24.
If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
The articles early modern period, modern era and late modern period cover very similar topics, but all are in a very bad state. All three are trying to simultaneously cover the periodization of (mostly) Europe-centered history and covering virtually all history within the timeframe of about 1500 until today, including the history of regions that aren't actually included in the concept of post-medieval history and modernity. The latter article is also quite a mess that confuses the idea of modernity with the historical period.
There's also the glaring problem that "late modern period" is what most historians describe as the "modern period". The concept of the modern era encompassing the entirety of post-medieval history pre-dates the concept of the "early modern". Other than Wikipedia, I've never seen historical works that describe the period of 1800 to today as "late modern", and the article late modern period doesn't actually have any references supporting the use of the term.
All of these articles need some serious attention because as they are right now, they are mostly just coatracks for any and all historical events that happen to have occurred between 1500 and today, regardless if they are relevant to the concept of periodization relating to modernity. All three articles need to be seriously overhauled based on sources that focus on the periods as a whole, not just any random source that happen to include "modern" in the title. Peter Isotalo 21:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
If no reliable independent sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it.Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 20:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
FYI portal:World War II has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.247.66 ( talk) 06:45, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
History of The Simpsons has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 11:39, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Dear WikiProject History Enthusiasts,
I'm reaching out to this knowledgeable community with a fascinating challenge and opportunity: the Portal Fernández Concha article. This isn't just any building; it's a portal (pun intended) to a rich tapestry of historical events, societal changes, and noteworthy moments that have left indelible marks on the cultural and historical landscape.
Why Your Expertise is Crucial:
What I'm Hoping for From This Collaboration:
This is more than just a call for edits; it's an invitation to be part of a collaborative effort to craft a piece of historical scholarship that will inform and engage readers for years to come. I believe that together, we can bring the rich history of Portal Fernández Concha to life in a way that honors its past and enlightens its future.
Thank you for considering this collaboration. I eagerly await your insights, contributions, and the rich historical tapestry we can weave together.
Best regards, TraceySear840 ( talk) 18:11, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Catholic Church has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 ( talk) 17:28, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
There is a split discussion at Talk:History of the United States (1789–1849)#Proposal to split (1789–1815) and (1815–1849). Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 06:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mughal–Maratha Wars#Requested move 8 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Imperial [AFCND] 14:25, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Indian campaigns of Muhammad of Ghor#Requested move 11 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Imperial [AFCND] 14:27, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:History of encyclopedias#Requested move 29 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 08:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Despite the consensus seeming to be in favour of keeping "internment" as the title of Internment of Japanese Americans, the article's text now solely uses the term "incarceration". Consistency between the two would be preferred, especially since the change to the article's text seems to have been made recently without discussion. Eldomtom2 ( talk) 13:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Dear All,
Please check urgently this post on reddit detailing how a few Hungarian editors are systematically rewriting articles on Romanian history. It needs intervention and professional editors to correct the changes. I also posted about this in the Administrators' noticeboard, please, contribute there. Adam Harangozó ( talk) 07:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:History of the Jews in Taiwan#Requested move 25 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 14:50, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
User:Buidhe has nominated Unification of Germany for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi, need your help. There's discussion regarding what to call result in Polish-Ukrainian conflict in 1940s. Partially discussion took place here as well. Dƶoxar ( talk) 11:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Would like editor's thoughts on this claim:
Discussion here:
-- David Tornheim ( talk) 07:28, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
I have set up Category:decade overviews as a set of categories, as well as articles, and navboxes, as part of WikiProject History Contemporary History task force, which I chair.
Please feel free to contact me any time, with any comments, ideas or questions. thanks! Sm8900 ( talk) 14:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kaunas Fortress has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Weaponization of antisemitism#Requested move 21 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 ( talk) 02:07, 28 April 2024 (UTC)