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. |
Hi all. I have just seen a post at the Teahouse regarding this project being revitalised (not really the right venue to promote stuff, but never mind). Although I am unlikely to participate in this Project myself, I am involved in a couple of other very small Projects, and might offer you some feedback as you get to grips with running it.
First off, the Project page is overly detailed and rather offputting. I might suggest trimming it down, and collapsing sections such as the Members list. I was surprised the article quality assessment table wasn't visible on the main Project page until I got right to the bottom - this is one of the key elements that can motivate people, either by finding unassessed articles, working on important articles, or improving stubs. It's also a way to encourage editors to Add the WikiProject template to talk pages.
I recently added a WP:Hot articles chart to a couple of Projects, and I find this a very good way to visibly highlight which articles are currently being edited (or vandalised) the most. Put this right up at the top of the page, and it brightens up the inevitable walls of text with something really useful and eye catching. Finally, I suggest someone goes through the 'Articles for Improvement' section and updates the entries. Quite a few pages listed as Stubs have since been reassessed. e.g. History of East Asia (C-class). For anyone interested in that side of the Project, the tool WP:RATER is very quick and easy to install and use. Good luck! Nick Moyes ( talk) 09:44, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi! There is an RfC at Talk:Mongol invasions of Vietnam#RfC: Infobox "result" parameter about whether the "result" parameter of the {{ Infobox military conflict}} at Mongol invasions of Vietnam should point to the aftermath section of the article body, say "Đại Việt victory" or list specific consequences. Any input there is appreciated! — MarkH21 talk 02:36, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
British America 28,138 937 Stub-- Coin945 ( talk) 14:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
In this discussion, there emerged a weak consensus to remove the significant people section on the 20th century page. I would like to discuss doing the same thing for other century pages such as 19th century, 18th century, 17th century, etc. I would like to discuss here regarding whether we should do the same for the others as well. Interstellarity ( talk) 13:06, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Hello all, I'm Iazyges. I mostly edit in the realm of Military History and have served as a coordinator on the WP:MILHIST project since 2016. User:Sm8900 has made me aware of his attempts to revive this wiki project, with one project being the integration of coordinator roles, seemingly similar to that of MILHIST. While MILHIST has an election structure set up, that's not exactly plausible to set up on a semi-active project. I would like to take up a position as a coordinator on this project unless there is opposition to such. Thank you. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:40, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
* Approved. Okay, the period for discussion of this proposal has now elapsed. We will be adding Iazyges as a coordinator for WP:History. Congratulations!! and we are glad to have you here at the project. to all members here, you are welcome to address any comments or questions that you may have to our new coordinator. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 12:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Hi everyone. Today, we are pleased to announce an editor who will be joining as a new coordinator for this WikiProject. User:Iazyges has extensive experience in topics relating to ancient history, particularly various leaders of ancient Rome. they have extensive experience with assessing articles, reviewing them, improving them, and bringing them up to GA or FA status. they will fulfil a valuable need here at this WikiProject.
I am amazed by the erudition and detail of the articles here on these areas, and I am glad that Wikipedia has editors who are able to address this important area. so we are glad to have Iazyges here, to help us increase our understanding and broaden our approach to earlier areas of history.
I have some ideas on how this project can proceed. This WikiProject is not necessarily needed to handle every historical era or topic in detail; for that, there are multiple existing history-related WikiProjects for specific topics, eras, countries, continents, cultures, etc; in the aggregate, all of these WikiProjects together already handle all of the subtopics within the broad field of history.
However, what if this WikiProject could serve as an introduction, for any editors who wish to edit in specialized areas of history, but are not sure of the ways to do so? for those editors, we can play a valuable role, in providing useful basic information on some of the methods needed to edit these topical areas. to that end, we hope to set up a few resources, tutorials, FAQs, etc etc, in the near future, to be of some help to editors who wish to learn more about the basic process for editing advanced historical topics.
User:Iazyges has broad experience as a coordinator at WP:Milhist. they have a broad knowledge and experience that will be helpful. and also, they have real experience with editing and reviewing multiple articles for ancient history topics. based on that, I have already added them as the initial member for two of our renewed Working Groups; i.e., for Article Assessment and for Article Review.
I hope everyone will find this wikiproject helpful as a resource. Please feel free to contact us with any questions, comments, or ideas, that you may have. I look forward to discussions here. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 13:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
I have nominated History of Baltimore City College for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 ( talk) 15:34, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
I recently created an infobox for expeditions: {{ Infobox expedition}}. I'm hoping it will be useful for some of our many articles under Category:Expeditions. (Interestingly, such a template has existed on ru wiki and wikis of a few related languages for over a decade, but AFAICT none has ever been attempted here.) As a starting point, I've added it to the following articles: Loaísa expedition, Magellan's circumnavigation, Denmark expedition.
Any feedback would be very much appreciated. Certain changes (like renaming or restructuring parameters) will be much easier to do if they're caught early on before the infobox is widely transcluded. I've started a thread on the talk page with some notes on potential additions/improvements. Colin M ( talk) 21:01, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
route_image_caption
, start_location
, and end_location
. Do you have any thoughts on what support for different modes of transport would look like? Were you just thinking of something like a "Mode of transport" field?
Colin M (
talk) 17:42, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
means_of_transport
where people could put things like "ship", "horse", "camel", "dog sled" or "motor sled". I'm not sure if that's already too much detailed info for an infobox; but on the other hand it's pretty basic info about the character of the voyage, so you could at least offer it. My thought was that you already had "ship", but many historical expeditions were landbound.character
meaning to display "military", "scientific" (HMS Beagle), "botanic" (HMS Bounty), "mercantile", "exploratory", "reconnaissance" and suchlike.final_approach_start_location
, final_approach_start_time
, final_approach_team_size
, final_approach_casualties
, final_approach_target_location
, final_approach_arrival_time
?key_people
. Thinking of people like
Pigafetta without whose chronicle we would know little of Magellan's and Elcano's feats.route_image_alt
, I think there's a guideline somewhere that in a perfect Wiki all images should have an alt text, too. --
ΟΥΤΙΣ (
talk) 20:21, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
ships
param was to have a place where the names of the ships involved could be listed (or the number of ships, if there are too many to enumerate), which doesn't exactly pattern match with the case for horses/sledges/etc.character
param could be subsumed by the existing "Goals" field?25 (preparatory approach)<br/>5 (final approach)
". I'd definitely be open to adding further parameters to accommodate this situation, but I'm unsure how much diversity there will be in how different expeditions can be logically broken down into phases.key_people
param. I think I will add that. (I am a little worried editors might be tempted to cram too much into the field. e.g. in the case of the Magellan voyage, there are at least 10 crew members other than Magellan/Elcano/Pigafetta who have articles, plus several other figures involved in the planning/funding/chronicling of the expedition. It would be unwieldy to list them all, but I can imagine an editor might try it anyways, or that it might lead to arguments over who was or wasn't a "key" person. But I'll just have to trust that people will be able to use it judiciously.)
Colin M (
talk) 21:31, 18 June 2021 (UTC)For cities whose date of establishment is not known, should they be categorised by the date of the earliest mention in historical records? Please see and comment at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_July_27#Establishments_based_on_first-mentioned_dates. – Fayenatic London 14:21, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I've recently become aware that Wikipedia has 8 different articles about various aspects of the Mountain Meadow Massacre and to me they all seem somewhat repetitious. Does Wikipedia need all of these articles? Can any of them be combined...should any of them be combined?
The articles are rendered in the Template:Mountain Meadows massacre series as:
I'm just wondering what people's thoughts are concerning these articles. Thanks, Shearonink ( talk) 21:15, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello editors of the WikiProject of History. I wanted to inform you guys that the WikiProject of the Twenty-Tens decade started recently. Feel free to join the new WikiProject! Elijahandskip ( talk) 02:27, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Alaouite dynasty#Requested move 15 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ( ♔ ♕) 02:42, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello, |
Hello, |
Hi WikiProject History,
The Lloyd’s Register Foundation, Heritage & Education Centre have just uploaded 5005 documents from our Ship Plan and Survey Report Collection to Wikimedia Commons that may be of interest to you. The ingestion is comprised of 16 boxes and accounts for 1082 ships across 184 unique places of build.
The documents include original handwritten correspondence from Lloyd's Register surveyors, ship plans and even a small selection of photographs. Examples include an annual report for Fiery Cross, a wreck report for Highwave, and cabin plan for the City of Simla.
In addition to the Ship Plan and Survey Report Collection, we are also beginning to ingest every edition of the Lloyd’s Register of Shipping until 1909 as well as a percentage of the First and Famous Collection, the world’s most iconic ships from within our collection. We will be sure to keep you updated on the progress of this next step.
Browse the full collection here.
We would really welcome some support with the resources and encourage you to share our documents on Wikipedia.
Thank you for all your help. LRFHEC ( talk) 11:17, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi all. There's an RfC here on including a CG image to illustrate the Welsh Not and how the device was worn by a child. Your comments would be appreciated. Thanks! Cell Danwydd ( talk) 15:41, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women's History § Women's rights by year article(s). {{u| Sdkb}} talk 22:01, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Almohad Expedition to Dukkala. -- Bejnar ( talk) 01:58, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
I have nominated History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm Talk 02:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Please note that November 2021 is the annual Wikipedia Asia month!!! You can visit the wikimedia page for more information. - Sm8900 ( talk) 🌍 04:38, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Visit the page on the CEE online meeting for details on joining and offering ideas. --- Sm8900 ( talk) 🌍 04:41, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Highland Clearances has recently been tagged for neutrality and factual accuracy. The view of this editor is that neither are appropriate, as the article is extensively referenced with the works of a range of leading historians in the field (in a strict attempt to comply with WP:HISTRS). It is an article on a subject that is an emotive issue for some, with a huge number of books on it written largely for the tourist market that pander to that sentiment (not solely my view, but also that of Tom Devine). It seems to be a subject that editors in history subjects stay away from. If anyone wanted to take a look, it would be welcome. Being heavily involved in the article, I suspect I am not the person to remove the tags. ThoughtIdRetired ( talk) 10:07, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
This article is listed as "vital importance" in history, but it's a real mess - mostly just a long list of books and dates. Someone on the talk page suggested deletion in 2007 to no reply. Does anyone here want to pick this up? Or to throw in a vote for deletion on the talk page? asilvering ( talk) 03:51, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
There is an RfC there that concerns this topic. Every opinion or other input is welcome. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 21:53, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
I have nominated History of Sheffield for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 ( talk) 16:19, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Yıva#Requested move 11 December 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ( ♔ ♕) 16:40, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
This article was just created in article space after having also been waiting for review in draft space for a few weeks. Will someone please review it to assess whether it is a neutral point of view explanation of a fringe theory that is being presented as a fringe theory? Is it adequately sourced both to sources presenting the theory and to sources criticizing the theory? Is the existence of the theory notable? Thank you. Robert McClenon ( talk) 03:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello, |
Hi everyone. this is your friendly neigborhood Coordinator for this WikiProject. I have made a new type of navbox for history topics, focusing upon one period in Europe's history. what do you think of this? feel free to comment, offer suggestions, etc. thanks!!!
--- Sm8900 ( talk) 🌍 16:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion about whether individual rulers of Turk Shahis and Nezak Huns deserve individual pages. Relevant links are:
Thanks, TrangaBellam ( talk) 13:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Hope to find collaboraters here for the Project!
I have nominated Inaugural games of the Flavian Amphitheatre for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 07:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Ancient Egyptian race controversy. Doug Weller talk 10:12, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
WP:FTN#Eyes needed on some pseuodhistorian articles. Doug Weller talk 16:39, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
I have posted an RfC on an editor's use of a source to declare 25+ colonial figures "Founding Fathers". To keep this neutral I won't say anything more except: Only a couple other editors have chimed in so far, and more opinions are needed to help resolve the dispute. My concern is I just discovered the changes a couple weeks ago, determined that they have stood since last October, and believe there's a possibility other sites on the internet may be echoing these claims.
The link to the RfC: Request for comment on use of sources. Any and all comments are most welcome. Allreet ( talk) 17:31, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello, what do you think about an infobox for epochs? I find it hard to read so much just to get a basic idea of that time! Basically I want to have a box about basic dates and characteristics. Do you think that would work? Greetings, Tresznjewski ( talk) 13:55, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Please help find consensus at Talk:History of Kyiv#Consistent spelling of the title term in the text. The question is whether the article text should use the spelling from its title. — Michael Z. 16:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Your input, one way or the other, on several pending proposals to alter NSPORTS would be welcomed. These proposals are as follows:
Hi all - I got my first page declined (Draft:Harrison Christian) due to a lack of secondary sources. I've now added five secondary sources about the subject and am wondering if that's enough. Any help appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darlenechu ( talk • contribs) 19:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
There is an ongoing discussion regarding the relevance of Faxian's quote on vegetarianism in ancient India. Rasnaboy ( talk) 18:36, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I've been considering making some updates to the article on the Spice Trade. I was wondering if its assessment as a B-class article is still correct, and if anyone would have some general pointers for me. Cheers, -- TimTheDragonRider ( talk) 13:30, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
As discussed here the history section of Ukraine needs to be shortened, which is obviously a tough job so I did not volunteer. Maybe you? Chidgk1 ( talk) 15:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
I've implemented User:Yapperbot/Pruner/use on Wikipedia:WikiProject History/Outreach/Participants as editors will start and stop. Generally, I'm against having a members list, at all, but this way we won't have an out-dated list. Chris Troutman ( talk) 18:10, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
There is a Request for Comments active at Talk:Founding Fathers of the United States on whether signers of the Continental Association should be considered Founding Fathers. Participation in the RFC is invited. Robert McClenon ( talk) 16:52, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
You are invited to join Contemporary History Task Force, at WikiProject History!! |
I would like to invite any interested editors here to join the task force for Contemporary History. One of our core goals is to highlight and promote the coverage of contemporary history as its own distinct area here at Wikipedia.
We differ from a simple effort to cover current events, in that we seek to provide the editing community with resources that would allow it to provide broad and comprehensive coverage of articles on contemporary history as a broad topical field, rather than simply on individual current events as they may occur.
to that end, we have set up articles such as 2020s in political history, which allow the whole editing community to adopt a broad scope in keeping wikipedia updated with broad historical trends, topics and events, as they occur, but also as they become relevant to the field of history overall. I hope that sounds helpful and worthwhile to you. you are welcome to join us in any way, or to offer any input or ideas that you may wish. we welcome your input. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 13:49, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
I've created a new stub called Everything's Gonna Be All White. I've added 9 references to the article and have added the infobox as well as the overview, cast, episodes and reception sections, but the article still needs some work like expanding and the episode list reformatted to the correct format. — Mythdon ( talk • contribs) 19:30, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
There is a dispute over whether this article violates NPOV, and whether it reflects the mainstream scholarly opinion. It could use more attention by editors with experience editing historical articles. - Thucydides411 ( talk) 07:46, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Talk:Historicity of the Book of Mormon, over whether the article in question should be in the category Pseudohistory, that may be of interest to watchers of this page. JimKaatFan ( talk) 12:10, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Talk:Anti-Armenian sentiment in Azerbaijan has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Vladimir.copic ( talk) 04:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi. I have begun to set up some new resources for covering current history. I have set up a new category tree for Category:Decade overviews. Additonally, I have modified some sections of two entries for contemporary history, to add some general sections that will be structured chronologically. you can view these articles at 2020s in political history, and 2020s in United States political history. I hope to build upon these, as time goes on. thanks! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 14:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
There is a RfC at Talk:Historicity of the Book of Mormon § RfC on category inclusion/exclusion as to whether Historicity of the Book of Mormon should to be included in the "pseudohistory" category. –– FormalDude talk 06:09, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi. I am the Lead Coordinator here at WP:HIST. I would like to form a task force for "Best Practices in History", which would be a task force to include and to benefit multiple WikiProjects that relate to history topics specifically. any interest? I'd like to get this off the ground if possible. please let me know. thanks!!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 22:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.
)and turns it into something like
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{ cite web}}, {{ cite journal}} and {{ doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
The formatting of the US presidency timelines is inconsistent. Some of the lists are all on a single page ( Harding), some are split by year ( Obama), and Trump and Biden are split by quarter. The latter two are also using a table format where every single day has its own row. It's clear that the lists get more and more granular as they get more recent in a dramatic example of WP:RECENTISM. Has there been any discussion of standardizing this series of articles? If not, how would such a process take place? I was thinking about creating some for the presidents that don't have them, but it looks like this whole series needs work. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 19:42, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
Talk:Nestor Makhno#Bank expropriation
Hello! Looking for some assistance contextualizing the size/importance of a 250,000-ruble bank expropriation during the Ukrainian War of Independence/Russian Revolution. Discussion linked above. czar 02:40, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi all! I'm not a regular editor of historical articles, though nearly half a year ago I tried to rewrite Dura-Europos. It came from this to its current shape, and I got stucked on further improvement. It would be great it somebody knowledgeable in that period can look through, "History" section really needs attention. I don't know why Dura-Europos and all related articles were in such a bad shape, this 'Pompeii of the desert' is really interesting and important from what I've read during my work on it. Artem.G ( talk) 07:34, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Just created article for Social crisis. if the Lead Coordinator role for WikiProject History has any organic roles or responsiblities, this is probably one of them. ok, carry on. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 20:55, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
I've added some context to the Confederate Memorial Day article, along with sources, as it's been well-established by historians that the holiday was originally promoted during the Jim Crow era to reinforce white supremacy, and revived during the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s (much like the concurrent rise of Confederate monuments). There's one editor who is insisting on removing this sourced material. I would prefer some editors get involved before it gets too ugly, because I have some experience with editors who want to removed what they consider "negative" items from an article, and I think a third or fourth party might be helpful here. Wes sideman ( talk) 13:16, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Please check this discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:57, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
User:Nutez has nominated Baháʼí Faith for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:26, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, |
Your input would be appreciated in the debate on Talk:History of smallpox. The article, the bulk of which was written before 2013, suffers from old age. A lot of new results published in 2016 and later are not reflected at all. Thanks for your help! Renerpho ( talk) 02:13, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
I wonder if anybody can tell me if the German wikipedia at Deportation von Juden aus Deutschland is already covered on Wikipedia. I've had a look for it, and while the coverage comprehensive, I can't seem to find it. Thanks. scope_creep Talk 10:23, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
It would be very convenient to have new channel "wphistory" in the discord server. Or even a new server entirely dedicated to history. I ask you to express your opinion on this proposal. Dintre ( talk) 19:55, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Hey @ Dintre:, could you please click the link below, and set up an account at the new forums that are based on Discourse? I'll be glad if we could work together there, to create a brand new channel or category, devoted to WP Hist! Let me know. Thanks:
https://forum.movement-strategy.org/invites/EKHU6eVqeV Sm8900 ( talk) 22:00, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
I have nominated Hoysala Empire for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:42, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
If someone has the time, interest, and knowledge it would be great if they can provide input in the thread "Excommunicated by the pope?" in the talk page of the article Louis VIII of France. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) Originally added 15:16, 4 August 2022 (UTC) Added again Thinker78 (talk) 23:41, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
If someone has the time and interest it would be great if they can provide input in the thread Talk:Louis X of France#First sentence. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 23:45, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, we need your input at this RFC. -- GoodDay ( talk) 06:13, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
I'm a volunteer with the AfC help desk. A draft for a research tool called Engineering Historical Memory was rejected and I'm trying to help the (connected) editor get the article accepted. The not yet resubmitted version sits at Draft:Engineering Historical Memory (EHM). I can't find any decent sources to show notability, but the project looks interesting, and utilizes Wikipedia. If anything, I thought this group would be interested in checking it out to see the split screen effect. It's apparently best with a Chrome browser. See the official web site. TechnoTalk ( talk) 06:29, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Your feedback would be appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject France#Consulat décennal, about whether the term "Consulat décennal" is still used by historians, in connection with a portion of the post-Revolutionary French Consulate period. Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 04:37, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Lorraine cycle#Requested move 13 August 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 05:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
User:Buidhe has nominated Swedish emigration to the United States 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) 04:19, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello everyone I have been asking for reviews for four years, for Post Classcal History. Come see if it deserves a B rating at least! Please come take a look, any feedback is appreciated. Sunriseshore ( talk) 15:04, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
There is an active page move discussion at Talk:Gautama Buddha about moving the page Gautama Buddha to The Buddha. This is of particular relevance to this project as it pertains to a religious figure of significant global standing and wide-ranging impact in the history of religion, philosophy, spirituality and mysticism. Iskandar323 ( talk) 13:38, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi all! Back in 2009, the article for Modern era was redirected to human history without discussion. Recently, editors at Talk:Early modern period noticed that this had taken place and decided to restore the Modern era article. However, while an article now exists on the modern era, it went unedited for a 13-year period and consequently is in need of editing and expansion. I wanted to call this to the project's attention in case anyone was interested in contributing. ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 17:40, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi all. There is a discussion at Talk:Songket about the origin of Songket. Your input on that discussion is appreciated. Ckfasdf ( talk) 01:29, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Human history#Requested move 16 October 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ( ♔ ♕) 15:39, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
This is a page split discussion over a history page has a 144kB readable prose size. Input from history project members would be appreciated. Iskandar323 ( talk) 18:58, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
Editors here may be interested in Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#musicandhistory.com. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:53, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
The page which had been Gautama Buddha was unsuccessfully proposed for a change to Siddhartha Gautama, then successfully changed to The Buddha, and is now being proposed for a change to Buddha. Your input and expertise would be most welcome at: Talk:The_Buddha#Requested_move_25_November_2022 Best, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 00:49, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, |
The present concensus recognizes only one civilization for the Middle Ages (the Islamic). Since one page is not sufficient for category, the category for medieval civilizations was deleted. Who ever believes that other civilizations existed in the Middle Ages is invited to Category talk:Civilizations by time.-- Maxaxa ( talk) 20:10, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
There is an ongoing Request for Comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years that may be of interest to this WikiProject. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 16:31, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi. Your input is welcome in the thread Talk:World War II#Seeking consensus to implement change in lead sentence. Cheers! -- Thinker78 (talk) 20:42, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
In an article on an historic event, should the article use the place names of the time of that event, or should they be translated (with all the risk of occasional error) into the name of the place now? If sources use the old place name, should that be modernised?
One could even be concerned that this destroys the principle of verifiability, as if all the place names have been changed from those used in sources, how can anyone check the accuracy of an article.
I am sure that one would still use Constantinople, Byzantium or Istanbul as appropriate. Why, then, is it appropriate to change, for instance Foochow to Fuzhou?
Please may I have some guidance on this as we have one user carrying out multiple changes of Chinese old place names to their modern equivalent. (See [1]) I would guess that this is not a new problem. ThoughtIdRetired ( talk) 00:18, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
ThoughtIdRetired and I discussed this over at my talk page; I think it was mostly just a misunderstanding and things have been cleared up now. TL;DR: I’m aware that historical place names are and should be used in articles pertaining to the time period when that name was in use. Wikipedia’s policy on Chinese romanization could be seen as a bit of an exception to this rule, for reasons I explained on my talk page. ThoughtIdRetired does make a good point, though, that when quotations from English primary sources are used in an article, any obsolete romanizations present in those quotations should be clarified to the reader in some way or another. I’ll be looking back through my recent edits to add those clarifications where necessary. SilverStar54 ( talk) 09:38, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
In cases where such a historical name is used, it should be followed by the modern name in round brackets (parentheses) on the first occurrence of the name in applicable sections of the article." Although that is couched in terms of changes of name, I think it equally appropriate for changes in latinisation, and would, for example, appear as "Foochow ( Fuzhou)". I amended a couple of articles accordingly, but will pause now to see where this discussion goes. Or should it be at MOS:GEO? Davidships ( talk) 01:55, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
"Older names should be used in appropriate historical contexts when a substantial majority of reliable modern sources do the same; this includes the names of articles relating to particular historical periods. Names have changed both because cities have been formally renamed and because cities have been taken from one state by another; in both cases, however, we are interested in what reliable English-language sources now use."
"In some cases it is not the local name but the spelling of the name in English that has changed over time. For example, Nanjing, as the contemporary pinyin spelling, is used for the name of the article rather than Nanking. However, the article on the Treaty of Nanking spells the city as was customary in 1842, because modern English scholarship still does."
Hello! I recently came across List of folk heroes, which had been trashed by a user who removed all references, categories, internal formatting, etc. and replaced it with an indiscriminate and unsourced list of random historical figures, fictional characters, and entirely made up hoax characters. I reverted it to the last stable version with references, only to find that this version is still sorely lacking in referencing and contains many kings and such. I have no idea how to tell if these people are folk heroes or not unless their article literally says "folk hero" in it. Therefore, I'm here to ask for help!
Its linked WikiProjects are WikiProject Folklore, which is inactive, and WikiProject lists, which has a rather inactive talk page. If this isn't the right WikiProject, please let me know where I should go. Thank you! Blue Edits ( talk) 15:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Please kindly check contributions of BasedHistorian PHD ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). I reverted some edits yesterday, but not sure about standing ones. Any expertise is welcome. Thanks, A09 ( talk) 11:14, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm making a post here to see how much interest there is in organizing a collaboration event. Things like this have been helpful for other WikiProjects to encourage focused activity and to grow their active editor base. There are a lot of ways that something like this can be done, but I'm thinking something simple: invite users to contribute to topics from a certain time period and add them to the list. Women in Red has events like this every month, and it seems to work pretty well. Any thoughts? Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 16:50, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I have opened comments for Renaissance on the talk page that identifies problems with the article. If these receives no comments by monday then I will open a GAR for it. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 19:09, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
I have seen an editor inappropriately marking articles as being of top importance to all WikiProjects, including this one. Please consider reviewing Category:Top-importance history articles and adjusting its contents as you see fit. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 02:55, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
This article appears to be part of this project, but your banner is not on the talk page
(As an aside, the list appears to a history of the US since the colonization by European settlers in the 15th century. A more meaningful name may be useful) 76.14.122.5 ( talk) 02:52, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Please see here: Talk:Iraqi_conflict_(2003–present)#Requested_move_6_March_2023 FOARP ( talk) 15:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RFC on using maps and charts in Wikipedia articles. Rs chen 7754 19:04, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Isabella II of Spain#Spain's only queen regnant. You are welcome joining it.-- Thinker78 (talk) 05:19, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Deportations during the Great Depression has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 11 § Deportations during the Great Depression until a consensus is reached. 64.229.90.172 ( talk) 06:40, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
the article Stresa Front needs to be re-written and re-sourced, the sources it has are dubious and entire sections are unsourced, the article is also written in a weird third person style following Mussolini, like a novel. the article is also framed weirdly as pro-Mussolini. I am woefully underskilled to re-write and research a whole article, so I am requesting that you fine Wikiproject editors check it out. Clone commando sev ( talk) 23:32, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at
Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent
Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class=
parameter to {{
WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{ WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{
WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom
parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present.
Aymatth2 (
talk) 14:36, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
There is a proposal that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject to make changes to how surnames of early Chinese figures are defined in a particular infobox at Talk:Chinese surname#Proposal to make changes to a protected template regarding Chinese surnames. Casting a wide net after no interest from more targeted WikiProjects. Folly Mox ( talk) 03:37, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Eh... there's a stub article on this imaginary place that someone knowledgeable in NW Africa really should clean up if they can spare the time. We shouldn't completely delete it since it does show up on many many period maps, but we should make it clear that it wasn't a real thing, who the actual people in the area were, and what the actual states were during the 1600s, 1700s, and 1800s when Europeans just handwaved the region with this mangled Arabic name. — LlywelynII 14:03, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
An editor has requested for 2022 Peruvian political crisis to be moved to another page. Since you had some involvement with 2022 Peruvian political crisis, you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so).-- WMrapids ( talk) 00:48, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
An editor has requested for Operation Gideon (2020) to be moved to another page. Since you had some involvement with Operation Gideon (2020), you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so). WMrapids ( talk) 17:48, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
An editor has requested for 2019 Venezuelan uprising attempt to be moved to another page. Since you had some involvement with 2019 Venezuelan uprising attempt, you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so). WMrapids ( talk) 17:50, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
For Namibia there is a naming issue with its pre-colonial period, outlined on Talk:History of Namibia#Pre-colonial name?. I haven't got any response yet. Someone here like to help? Thanks, Pgallert ( talk) 06:09, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
History of Singapore 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. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 21:06, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Habsburg monarchy has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. User23242343 ( talk) 15:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
I am in some discussion with the major contributor to Galley about the length of the article. To me, the article seems over-long and suffers because of it. There is discussion at Talk:Galley#Length of article. This is where you will find my suggestion of splitting the article along the natural division: (a) galleys of the classical and pre-history periods (b) medieval and post-medieval galleys.
Please would editors take a look and express an opinion. Thanks, ThoughtIdRetired ( talk) 09:01, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
If anyone is interested, the Assassination of John F. Kennedy has been nominated for Featured Article promotion. Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks, ~ HAL 333 18:36, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Uranium mining in the Bancroft area has been nominated for Featured Article status. If you are interested to review the article, that would be helpful, as it needs at least one more review to avoid timing out.
Link: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Uranium mining in the Bancroft area/archive1 CT55555( talk) 12:25, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
I've been working on the article about the Victorian era a great deal this year and have recently got it to good article status. I'm hopping to get it to featured article status over the next few months which would be my first featured article. What kind of changes do you think would be needed to get their?
Link to peer review page: Wikipedia:Peer review/Victorian era/archive1 Llewee ( talk) 14:39, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
There's a discussion about moving the article Witchcraft to Witchcraft (classical) and moving Witchcraft (disambiguation) to Witchcraft instead, at Talk:Witchcraft#Requested move 19 July 2023. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 21:29, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Several nationalistic editors have added irrelevant petty lords as chief commanders in the infobox based on their personal notion that just participating in the battle is enough to include them. Not to mention that they rammed it by brute force and what seems to be tag teaming. Considering that the battle is of chief importance for Serbian history, adding some local Albanians in the infobox stinks of nationalistic editing. Because the subjects attracts a small number of editors, they might get away with it. It's so strange. I have no permission to act. Please help Wikipedia to get this mess cleaned. 178.220.230.153 ( talk) 10:59, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Renaissance 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. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 03:01, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
An RfC of possible interest to this WikiProject can be found here.
Beyond My Ken ( talk) 17:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej ( talk) 18:02, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Talk:Menologem currently has a very specific but gaping hole in its content about either how other officials were authorized to use them or how no other officials were ever authorized to use them. — LlywelynII 06:29, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:National identity#Requested move 12 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 08:18, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi – this seems like a very promising article on a notable subject. Not new as such, but could do with some copyedits from members of this Wikiproject if anyone is interested. Thanks 😊 GnocchiFan ( talk) 14:36, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
May I please join? Thanks, Cheaha Summit ( talk) 17:32, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi there. I do not know if there is a more appropriate area in this WikiProject for this but I want to call attention to the article Baltimore Plot, which could use the help of this project. The article covers what seems to be a mildly important historical event but suffers from a lack of sources and general need of expansion and maintenance. Please let me know if there is somewhere more appropriate for this request. Thanks, -- Lenny Marks ( talk) 15:27, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Operation Gideon (2020)#2020 Venezuelan coup attempt round III that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. WMrapids ( talk) 04:32, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, |
Anyone who is historian-minded want to evaluate where the US bombing of Korean dams in WWII is a war crime? Then, take a look at: Talk:United States war crimes#why deletion of Korean dam bombing? – ishwar (speak) 08:57, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 10#Category:Assassinated heads of government that includes historical relevance of the concept of head of government, whether viziers were heads of government, among other things. Your input is welcome. Regards, -- Thinker78 (talk) 21:46, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Does the subject of this draft satisfy academic notability? Should this draft be accepted? Robert McClenon ( talk) 05:02, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Modern era#Requested move 3 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 17:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
This seems like an important and interesting subject. Could I have some help and input on how to move forward with it? FloridaArmy ( talk) 22:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
There is a discussion on "Allied states" vs "Allied and satellite states" terminology in Template_talk:Eastern_Bloc_sidebar#Allied vs satellite states. More input would be welcome. -- Mindaur ( talk) 12:44, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
I have created a page on the subject of Nakba denial - a topic of some weight in literature on the historiography of the Arab-Israeli conflict. I have barely scratched the surface of the available source, having prioritized the most readily accessible ones. There may very well be some gaping gaps, not least in that I don't have access to any of the best Ilan Pappé material, so haven't been able to directly quote him. More eyes welcome. Iskandar323 ( talk) 19:25, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
There's a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States#History of the United States articles that may be of interest to this project. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 00:42, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, |
I will need help with updating the list. Please see my latest post for more details. Interstellarity ( talk) 11:40, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
I have nominated Byzantine Empire 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) 22:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
There is a merge proposal to merge The United States and the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars into History of the United States (1789–1849). The discussion is in a deadlock due to lack of input. The writer of the first article opposes the merge while I, as proposer, support the merge. More input is needed and appreciated. The Banner talk 22:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
I don't get it. Mind you, I did not edit a long time, but have things changed and I missed the memo? I asked the same question on the TP, please help with this issue. 178.220.230.153 ( talk) 16:48, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Dynasties in Chinese history#Requested move 27 October 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 17:55, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, there is a RfC regarding notability guideline for minor/rural places at this link. बिनोद थारू ( talk) 02:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
United States involvement in regime change in Latin America has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. WMrapids ( talk) 18:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
I have nominated Battle of Red Cliffs 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. a455bcd9 (Antoine) ( talk) 16:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi everyone - just letting this WikiProject know that a Peer Review of LGBT in the Ottoman Empire (with the intention of improving this to Good Article status) is currently under way. If anyone has anything to add to the article / review, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! GnocchiFan ( talk) 17:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
An editor has requested that Guayana Esequiba be moved to Guyana–Venezuela territorial dispute, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. -- WMrapids ( talk) 20:48, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
History of private equity and venture capital 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) 00:15, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested merge discussion at Talk:Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Merge_discussion that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Dan the Animator 22:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
An editor has requested that 2023 Guayana Esequiba crisis be moved to 2023 Guyana–Venezuela crisis, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion.-- WMrapids ( talk) 03:20, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
I need help scouring through Category:Fictional characters by period in order to extend Category:Fictional characters by period as far back as possibly the 4th millennium BC, which would mirror the calendar-date categories in Category:Historical fiction by period of setting and Category:Works about the future; we are going no deeper than the century level, similar to Category:People by century. I've done all of the future time periods from the 25th century onward, and other users have covered the 16th through 24th centuries and the 6th millennium.
I'm also considering combining all of the setting-by-calendar-date categories into a new category, which should smooth navigation from the past to the future. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 05:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Please review my draft Draft:Amaru Topa Inca Encyclopédisme ( talk) 04:45, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at
Talk:History of the Russian Federation#Requested move 25 December 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. –
Hilst
[talk]
16:00, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Hoysala Empire#Requested move 7 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 19:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:History (American TV network)#Requested move 6 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 19:35, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Azerbaijani-Mongolian cultural relations#Requested move 23 December 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 14:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Fools revolt#Requested move 12 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 20:49, 12 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)
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. |
Hi all. I have just seen a post at the Teahouse regarding this project being revitalised (not really the right venue to promote stuff, but never mind). Although I am unlikely to participate in this Project myself, I am involved in a couple of other very small Projects, and might offer you some feedback as you get to grips with running it.
First off, the Project page is overly detailed and rather offputting. I might suggest trimming it down, and collapsing sections such as the Members list. I was surprised the article quality assessment table wasn't visible on the main Project page until I got right to the bottom - this is one of the key elements that can motivate people, either by finding unassessed articles, working on important articles, or improving stubs. It's also a way to encourage editors to Add the WikiProject template to talk pages.
I recently added a WP:Hot articles chart to a couple of Projects, and I find this a very good way to visibly highlight which articles are currently being edited (or vandalised) the most. Put this right up at the top of the page, and it brightens up the inevitable walls of text with something really useful and eye catching. Finally, I suggest someone goes through the 'Articles for Improvement' section and updates the entries. Quite a few pages listed as Stubs have since been reassessed. e.g. History of East Asia (C-class). For anyone interested in that side of the Project, the tool WP:RATER is very quick and easy to install and use. Good luck! Nick Moyes ( talk) 09:44, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi! There is an RfC at Talk:Mongol invasions of Vietnam#RfC: Infobox "result" parameter about whether the "result" parameter of the {{ Infobox military conflict}} at Mongol invasions of Vietnam should point to the aftermath section of the article body, say "Đại Việt victory" or list specific consequences. Any input there is appreciated! — MarkH21 talk 02:36, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
British America 28,138 937 Stub-- Coin945 ( talk) 14:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
In this discussion, there emerged a weak consensus to remove the significant people section on the 20th century page. I would like to discuss doing the same thing for other century pages such as 19th century, 18th century, 17th century, etc. I would like to discuss here regarding whether we should do the same for the others as well. Interstellarity ( talk) 13:06, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Hello all, I'm Iazyges. I mostly edit in the realm of Military History and have served as a coordinator on the WP:MILHIST project since 2016. User:Sm8900 has made me aware of his attempts to revive this wiki project, with one project being the integration of coordinator roles, seemingly similar to that of MILHIST. While MILHIST has an election structure set up, that's not exactly plausible to set up on a semi-active project. I would like to take up a position as a coordinator on this project unless there is opposition to such. Thank you. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:40, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
* Approved. Okay, the period for discussion of this proposal has now elapsed. We will be adding Iazyges as a coordinator for WP:History. Congratulations!! and we are glad to have you here at the project. to all members here, you are welcome to address any comments or questions that you may have to our new coordinator. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 12:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Hi everyone. Today, we are pleased to announce an editor who will be joining as a new coordinator for this WikiProject. User:Iazyges has extensive experience in topics relating to ancient history, particularly various leaders of ancient Rome. they have extensive experience with assessing articles, reviewing them, improving them, and bringing them up to GA or FA status. they will fulfil a valuable need here at this WikiProject.
I am amazed by the erudition and detail of the articles here on these areas, and I am glad that Wikipedia has editors who are able to address this important area. so we are glad to have Iazyges here, to help us increase our understanding and broaden our approach to earlier areas of history.
I have some ideas on how this project can proceed. This WikiProject is not necessarily needed to handle every historical era or topic in detail; for that, there are multiple existing history-related WikiProjects for specific topics, eras, countries, continents, cultures, etc; in the aggregate, all of these WikiProjects together already handle all of the subtopics within the broad field of history.
However, what if this WikiProject could serve as an introduction, for any editors who wish to edit in specialized areas of history, but are not sure of the ways to do so? for those editors, we can play a valuable role, in providing useful basic information on some of the methods needed to edit these topical areas. to that end, we hope to set up a few resources, tutorials, FAQs, etc etc, in the near future, to be of some help to editors who wish to learn more about the basic process for editing advanced historical topics.
User:Iazyges has broad experience as a coordinator at WP:Milhist. they have a broad knowledge and experience that will be helpful. and also, they have real experience with editing and reviewing multiple articles for ancient history topics. based on that, I have already added them as the initial member for two of our renewed Working Groups; i.e., for Article Assessment and for Article Review.
I hope everyone will find this wikiproject helpful as a resource. Please feel free to contact us with any questions, comments, or ideas, that you may have. I look forward to discussions here. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 13:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
I have nominated History of Baltimore City College for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 ( talk) 15:34, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
I recently created an infobox for expeditions: {{ Infobox expedition}}. I'm hoping it will be useful for some of our many articles under Category:Expeditions. (Interestingly, such a template has existed on ru wiki and wikis of a few related languages for over a decade, but AFAICT none has ever been attempted here.) As a starting point, I've added it to the following articles: Loaísa expedition, Magellan's circumnavigation, Denmark expedition.
Any feedback would be very much appreciated. Certain changes (like renaming or restructuring parameters) will be much easier to do if they're caught early on before the infobox is widely transcluded. I've started a thread on the talk page with some notes on potential additions/improvements. Colin M ( talk) 21:01, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
route_image_caption
, start_location
, and end_location
. Do you have any thoughts on what support for different modes of transport would look like? Were you just thinking of something like a "Mode of transport" field?
Colin M (
talk) 17:42, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
means_of_transport
where people could put things like "ship", "horse", "camel", "dog sled" or "motor sled". I'm not sure if that's already too much detailed info for an infobox; but on the other hand it's pretty basic info about the character of the voyage, so you could at least offer it. My thought was that you already had "ship", but many historical expeditions were landbound.character
meaning to display "military", "scientific" (HMS Beagle), "botanic" (HMS Bounty), "mercantile", "exploratory", "reconnaissance" and suchlike.final_approach_start_location
, final_approach_start_time
, final_approach_team_size
, final_approach_casualties
, final_approach_target_location
, final_approach_arrival_time
?key_people
. Thinking of people like
Pigafetta without whose chronicle we would know little of Magellan's and Elcano's feats.route_image_alt
, I think there's a guideline somewhere that in a perfect Wiki all images should have an alt text, too. --
ΟΥΤΙΣ (
talk) 20:21, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
ships
param was to have a place where the names of the ships involved could be listed (or the number of ships, if there are too many to enumerate), which doesn't exactly pattern match with the case for horses/sledges/etc.character
param could be subsumed by the existing "Goals" field?25 (preparatory approach)<br/>5 (final approach)
". I'd definitely be open to adding further parameters to accommodate this situation, but I'm unsure how much diversity there will be in how different expeditions can be logically broken down into phases.key_people
param. I think I will add that. (I am a little worried editors might be tempted to cram too much into the field. e.g. in the case of the Magellan voyage, there are at least 10 crew members other than Magellan/Elcano/Pigafetta who have articles, plus several other figures involved in the planning/funding/chronicling of the expedition. It would be unwieldy to list them all, but I can imagine an editor might try it anyways, or that it might lead to arguments over who was or wasn't a "key" person. But I'll just have to trust that people will be able to use it judiciously.)
Colin M (
talk) 21:31, 18 June 2021 (UTC)For cities whose date of establishment is not known, should they be categorised by the date of the earliest mention in historical records? Please see and comment at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_July_27#Establishments_based_on_first-mentioned_dates. – Fayenatic London 14:21, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I've recently become aware that Wikipedia has 8 different articles about various aspects of the Mountain Meadow Massacre and to me they all seem somewhat repetitious. Does Wikipedia need all of these articles? Can any of them be combined...should any of them be combined?
The articles are rendered in the Template:Mountain Meadows massacre series as:
I'm just wondering what people's thoughts are concerning these articles. Thanks, Shearonink ( talk) 21:15, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello editors of the WikiProject of History. I wanted to inform you guys that the WikiProject of the Twenty-Tens decade started recently. Feel free to join the new WikiProject! Elijahandskip ( talk) 02:27, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Alaouite dynasty#Requested move 15 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ( ♔ ♕) 02:42, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello, |
Hello, |
Hi WikiProject History,
The Lloyd’s Register Foundation, Heritage & Education Centre have just uploaded 5005 documents from our Ship Plan and Survey Report Collection to Wikimedia Commons that may be of interest to you. The ingestion is comprised of 16 boxes and accounts for 1082 ships across 184 unique places of build.
The documents include original handwritten correspondence from Lloyd's Register surveyors, ship plans and even a small selection of photographs. Examples include an annual report for Fiery Cross, a wreck report for Highwave, and cabin plan for the City of Simla.
In addition to the Ship Plan and Survey Report Collection, we are also beginning to ingest every edition of the Lloyd’s Register of Shipping until 1909 as well as a percentage of the First and Famous Collection, the world’s most iconic ships from within our collection. We will be sure to keep you updated on the progress of this next step.
Browse the full collection here.
We would really welcome some support with the resources and encourage you to share our documents on Wikipedia.
Thank you for all your help. LRFHEC ( talk) 11:17, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi all. There's an RfC here on including a CG image to illustrate the Welsh Not and how the device was worn by a child. Your comments would be appreciated. Thanks! Cell Danwydd ( talk) 15:41, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women's History § Women's rights by year article(s). {{u| Sdkb}} talk 22:01, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Almohad Expedition to Dukkala. -- Bejnar ( talk) 01:58, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
I have nominated History of Arsenal F.C. (1886–1966) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm Talk 02:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Please note that November 2021 is the annual Wikipedia Asia month!!! You can visit the wikimedia page for more information. - Sm8900 ( talk) 🌍 04:38, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Visit the page on the CEE online meeting for details on joining and offering ideas. --- Sm8900 ( talk) 🌍 04:41, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Highland Clearances has recently been tagged for neutrality and factual accuracy. The view of this editor is that neither are appropriate, as the article is extensively referenced with the works of a range of leading historians in the field (in a strict attempt to comply with WP:HISTRS). It is an article on a subject that is an emotive issue for some, with a huge number of books on it written largely for the tourist market that pander to that sentiment (not solely my view, but also that of Tom Devine). It seems to be a subject that editors in history subjects stay away from. If anyone wanted to take a look, it would be welcome. Being heavily involved in the article, I suspect I am not the person to remove the tags. ThoughtIdRetired ( talk) 10:07, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
This article is listed as "vital importance" in history, but it's a real mess - mostly just a long list of books and dates. Someone on the talk page suggested deletion in 2007 to no reply. Does anyone here want to pick this up? Or to throw in a vote for deletion on the talk page? asilvering ( talk) 03:51, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
There is an RfC there that concerns this topic. Every opinion or other input is welcome. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 21:53, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
I have nominated History of Sheffield for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 ( talk) 16:19, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Yıva#Requested move 11 December 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ( ♔ ♕) 16:40, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
This article was just created in article space after having also been waiting for review in draft space for a few weeks. Will someone please review it to assess whether it is a neutral point of view explanation of a fringe theory that is being presented as a fringe theory? Is it adequately sourced both to sources presenting the theory and to sources criticizing the theory? Is the existence of the theory notable? Thank you. Robert McClenon ( talk) 03:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello, |
Hi everyone. this is your friendly neigborhood Coordinator for this WikiProject. I have made a new type of navbox for history topics, focusing upon one period in Europe's history. what do you think of this? feel free to comment, offer suggestions, etc. thanks!!!
--- Sm8900 ( talk) 🌍 16:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion about whether individual rulers of Turk Shahis and Nezak Huns deserve individual pages. Relevant links are:
Thanks, TrangaBellam ( talk) 13:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Hope to find collaboraters here for the Project!
I have nominated Inaugural games of the Flavian Amphitheatre for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 07:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Ancient Egyptian race controversy. Doug Weller talk 10:12, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
WP:FTN#Eyes needed on some pseuodhistorian articles. Doug Weller talk 16:39, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
I have posted an RfC on an editor's use of a source to declare 25+ colonial figures "Founding Fathers". To keep this neutral I won't say anything more except: Only a couple other editors have chimed in so far, and more opinions are needed to help resolve the dispute. My concern is I just discovered the changes a couple weeks ago, determined that they have stood since last October, and believe there's a possibility other sites on the internet may be echoing these claims.
The link to the RfC: Request for comment on use of sources. Any and all comments are most welcome. Allreet ( talk) 17:31, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello, what do you think about an infobox for epochs? I find it hard to read so much just to get a basic idea of that time! Basically I want to have a box about basic dates and characteristics. Do you think that would work? Greetings, Tresznjewski ( talk) 13:55, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Please help find consensus at Talk:History of Kyiv#Consistent spelling of the title term in the text. The question is whether the article text should use the spelling from its title. — Michael Z. 16:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Your input, one way or the other, on several pending proposals to alter NSPORTS would be welcomed. These proposals are as follows:
Hi all - I got my first page declined (Draft:Harrison Christian) due to a lack of secondary sources. I've now added five secondary sources about the subject and am wondering if that's enough. Any help appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darlenechu ( talk • contribs) 19:05, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
There is an ongoing discussion regarding the relevance of Faxian's quote on vegetarianism in ancient India. Rasnaboy ( talk) 18:36, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I've been considering making some updates to the article on the Spice Trade. I was wondering if its assessment as a B-class article is still correct, and if anyone would have some general pointers for me. Cheers, -- TimTheDragonRider ( talk) 13:30, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
As discussed here the history section of Ukraine needs to be shortened, which is obviously a tough job so I did not volunteer. Maybe you? Chidgk1 ( talk) 15:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
I've implemented User:Yapperbot/Pruner/use on Wikipedia:WikiProject History/Outreach/Participants as editors will start and stop. Generally, I'm against having a members list, at all, but this way we won't have an out-dated list. Chris Troutman ( talk) 18:10, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
There is a Request for Comments active at Talk:Founding Fathers of the United States on whether signers of the Continental Association should be considered Founding Fathers. Participation in the RFC is invited. Robert McClenon ( talk) 16:52, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
You are invited to join Contemporary History Task Force, at WikiProject History!! |
I would like to invite any interested editors here to join the task force for Contemporary History. One of our core goals is to highlight and promote the coverage of contemporary history as its own distinct area here at Wikipedia.
We differ from a simple effort to cover current events, in that we seek to provide the editing community with resources that would allow it to provide broad and comprehensive coverage of articles on contemporary history as a broad topical field, rather than simply on individual current events as they may occur.
to that end, we have set up articles such as 2020s in political history, which allow the whole editing community to adopt a broad scope in keeping wikipedia updated with broad historical trends, topics and events, as they occur, but also as they become relevant to the field of history overall. I hope that sounds helpful and worthwhile to you. you are welcome to join us in any way, or to offer any input or ideas that you may wish. we welcome your input. thanks!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 13:49, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
I've created a new stub called Everything's Gonna Be All White. I've added 9 references to the article and have added the infobox as well as the overview, cast, episodes and reception sections, but the article still needs some work like expanding and the episode list reformatted to the correct format. — Mythdon ( talk • contribs) 19:30, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
There is a dispute over whether this article violates NPOV, and whether it reflects the mainstream scholarly opinion. It could use more attention by editors with experience editing historical articles. - Thucydides411 ( talk) 07:46, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Talk:Historicity of the Book of Mormon, over whether the article in question should be in the category Pseudohistory, that may be of interest to watchers of this page. JimKaatFan ( talk) 12:10, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Talk:Anti-Armenian sentiment in Azerbaijan has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Vladimir.copic ( talk) 04:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi. I have begun to set up some new resources for covering current history. I have set up a new category tree for Category:Decade overviews. Additonally, I have modified some sections of two entries for contemporary history, to add some general sections that will be structured chronologically. you can view these articles at 2020s in political history, and 2020s in United States political history. I hope to build upon these, as time goes on. thanks! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 14:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
There is a RfC at Talk:Historicity of the Book of Mormon § RfC on category inclusion/exclusion as to whether Historicity of the Book of Mormon should to be included in the "pseudohistory" category. –– FormalDude talk 06:09, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi. I am the Lead Coordinator here at WP:HIST. I would like to form a task force for "Best Practices in History", which would be a task force to include and to benefit multiple WikiProjects that relate to history topics specifically. any interest? I'd like to get this off the ground if possible. please let me know. thanks!!! -- Sm8900 ( talk) 22:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.
)and turns it into something like
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{ cite web}}, {{ cite journal}} and {{ doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
The formatting of the US presidency timelines is inconsistent. Some of the lists are all on a single page ( Harding), some are split by year ( Obama), and Trump and Biden are split by quarter. The latter two are also using a table format where every single day has its own row. It's clear that the lists get more and more granular as they get more recent in a dramatic example of WP:RECENTISM. Has there been any discussion of standardizing this series of articles? If not, how would such a process take place? I was thinking about creating some for the presidents that don't have them, but it looks like this whole series needs work. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 19:42, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
Talk:Nestor Makhno#Bank expropriation
Hello! Looking for some assistance contextualizing the size/importance of a 250,000-ruble bank expropriation during the Ukrainian War of Independence/Russian Revolution. Discussion linked above. czar 02:40, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi all! I'm not a regular editor of historical articles, though nearly half a year ago I tried to rewrite Dura-Europos. It came from this to its current shape, and I got stucked on further improvement. It would be great it somebody knowledgeable in that period can look through, "History" section really needs attention. I don't know why Dura-Europos and all related articles were in such a bad shape, this 'Pompeii of the desert' is really interesting and important from what I've read during my work on it. Artem.G ( talk) 07:34, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Just created article for Social crisis. if the Lead Coordinator role for WikiProject History has any organic roles or responsiblities, this is probably one of them. ok, carry on. -- Sm8900 ( talk) 20:55, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
I've added some context to the Confederate Memorial Day article, along with sources, as it's been well-established by historians that the holiday was originally promoted during the Jim Crow era to reinforce white supremacy, and revived during the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s (much like the concurrent rise of Confederate monuments). There's one editor who is insisting on removing this sourced material. I would prefer some editors get involved before it gets too ugly, because I have some experience with editors who want to removed what they consider "negative" items from an article, and I think a third or fourth party might be helpful here. Wes sideman ( talk) 13:16, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Please check this discussion. Marcocapelle ( talk) 04:57, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
User:Nutez has nominated Baháʼí Faith for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:26, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello, |
Your input would be appreciated in the debate on Talk:History of smallpox. The article, the bulk of which was written before 2013, suffers from old age. A lot of new results published in 2016 and later are not reflected at all. Thanks for your help! Renerpho ( talk) 02:13, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
I wonder if anybody can tell me if the German wikipedia at Deportation von Juden aus Deutschland is already covered on Wikipedia. I've had a look for it, and while the coverage comprehensive, I can't seem to find it. Thanks. scope_creep Talk 10:23, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
It would be very convenient to have new channel "wphistory" in the discord server. Or even a new server entirely dedicated to history. I ask you to express your opinion on this proposal. Dintre ( talk) 19:55, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Hey @ Dintre:, could you please click the link below, and set up an account at the new forums that are based on Discourse? I'll be glad if we could work together there, to create a brand new channel or category, devoted to WP Hist! Let me know. Thanks:
https://forum.movement-strategy.org/invites/EKHU6eVqeV Sm8900 ( talk) 22:00, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
I have nominated Hoysala Empire for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:42, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
If someone has the time, interest, and knowledge it would be great if they can provide input in the thread "Excommunicated by the pope?" in the talk page of the article Louis VIII of France. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) Originally added 15:16, 4 August 2022 (UTC) Added again Thinker78 (talk) 23:41, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
If someone has the time and interest it would be great if they can provide input in the thread Talk:Louis X of France#First sentence. Cheers! Thinker78 (talk) 23:45, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, we need your input at this RFC. -- GoodDay ( talk) 06:13, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
I'm a volunteer with the AfC help desk. A draft for a research tool called Engineering Historical Memory was rejected and I'm trying to help the (connected) editor get the article accepted. The not yet resubmitted version sits at Draft:Engineering Historical Memory (EHM). I can't find any decent sources to show notability, but the project looks interesting, and utilizes Wikipedia. If anything, I thought this group would be interested in checking it out to see the split screen effect. It's apparently best with a Chrome browser. See the official web site. TechnoTalk ( talk) 06:29, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Your feedback would be appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject France#Consulat décennal, about whether the term "Consulat décennal" is still used by historians, in connection with a portion of the post-Revolutionary French Consulate period. Thanks, Mathglot ( talk) 04:37, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Lorraine cycle#Requested move 13 August 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 05:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
User:Buidhe has nominated Swedish emigration to the United States 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) 04:19, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello everyone I have been asking for reviews for four years, for Post Classcal History. Come see if it deserves a B rating at least! Please come take a look, any feedback is appreciated. Sunriseshore ( talk) 15:04, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
There is an active page move discussion at Talk:Gautama Buddha about moving the page Gautama Buddha to The Buddha. This is of particular relevance to this project as it pertains to a religious figure of significant global standing and wide-ranging impact in the history of religion, philosophy, spirituality and mysticism. Iskandar323 ( talk) 13:38, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi all! Back in 2009, the article for Modern era was redirected to human history without discussion. Recently, editors at Talk:Early modern period noticed that this had taken place and decided to restore the Modern era article. However, while an article now exists on the modern era, it went unedited for a 13-year period and consequently is in need of editing and expansion. I wanted to call this to the project's attention in case anyone was interested in contributing. ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 17:40, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi all. There is a discussion at Talk:Songket about the origin of Songket. Your input on that discussion is appreciated. Ckfasdf ( talk) 01:29, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Human history#Requested move 16 October 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink ( ♔ ♕) 15:39, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
This is a page split discussion over a history page has a 144kB readable prose size. Input from history project members would be appreciated. Iskandar323 ( talk) 18:58, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
Editors here may be interested in Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#musicandhistory.com. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:53, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
The page which had been Gautama Buddha was unsuccessfully proposed for a change to Siddhartha Gautama, then successfully changed to The Buddha, and is now being proposed for a change to Buddha. Your input and expertise would be most welcome at: Talk:The_Buddha#Requested_move_25_November_2022 Best, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 00:49, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, |
The present concensus recognizes only one civilization for the Middle Ages (the Islamic). Since one page is not sufficient for category, the category for medieval civilizations was deleted. Who ever believes that other civilizations existed in the Middle Ages is invited to Category talk:Civilizations by time.-- Maxaxa ( talk) 20:10, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
There is an ongoing Request for Comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years that may be of interest to this WikiProject. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 16:31, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi. Your input is welcome in the thread Talk:World War II#Seeking consensus to implement change in lead sentence. Cheers! -- Thinker78 (talk) 20:42, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
In an article on an historic event, should the article use the place names of the time of that event, or should they be translated (with all the risk of occasional error) into the name of the place now? If sources use the old place name, should that be modernised?
One could even be concerned that this destroys the principle of verifiability, as if all the place names have been changed from those used in sources, how can anyone check the accuracy of an article.
I am sure that one would still use Constantinople, Byzantium or Istanbul as appropriate. Why, then, is it appropriate to change, for instance Foochow to Fuzhou?
Please may I have some guidance on this as we have one user carrying out multiple changes of Chinese old place names to their modern equivalent. (See [1]) I would guess that this is not a new problem. ThoughtIdRetired ( talk) 00:18, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
ThoughtIdRetired and I discussed this over at my talk page; I think it was mostly just a misunderstanding and things have been cleared up now. TL;DR: I’m aware that historical place names are and should be used in articles pertaining to the time period when that name was in use. Wikipedia’s policy on Chinese romanization could be seen as a bit of an exception to this rule, for reasons I explained on my talk page. ThoughtIdRetired does make a good point, though, that when quotations from English primary sources are used in an article, any obsolete romanizations present in those quotations should be clarified to the reader in some way or another. I’ll be looking back through my recent edits to add those clarifications where necessary. SilverStar54 ( talk) 09:38, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
In cases where such a historical name is used, it should be followed by the modern name in round brackets (parentheses) on the first occurrence of the name in applicable sections of the article." Although that is couched in terms of changes of name, I think it equally appropriate for changes in latinisation, and would, for example, appear as "Foochow ( Fuzhou)". I amended a couple of articles accordingly, but will pause now to see where this discussion goes. Or should it be at MOS:GEO? Davidships ( talk) 01:55, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
"Older names should be used in appropriate historical contexts when a substantial majority of reliable modern sources do the same; this includes the names of articles relating to particular historical periods. Names have changed both because cities have been formally renamed and because cities have been taken from one state by another; in both cases, however, we are interested in what reliable English-language sources now use."
"In some cases it is not the local name but the spelling of the name in English that has changed over time. For example, Nanjing, as the contemporary pinyin spelling, is used for the name of the article rather than Nanking. However, the article on the Treaty of Nanking spells the city as was customary in 1842, because modern English scholarship still does."
Hello! I recently came across List of folk heroes, which had been trashed by a user who removed all references, categories, internal formatting, etc. and replaced it with an indiscriminate and unsourced list of random historical figures, fictional characters, and entirely made up hoax characters. I reverted it to the last stable version with references, only to find that this version is still sorely lacking in referencing and contains many kings and such. I have no idea how to tell if these people are folk heroes or not unless their article literally says "folk hero" in it. Therefore, I'm here to ask for help!
Its linked WikiProjects are WikiProject Folklore, which is inactive, and WikiProject lists, which has a rather inactive talk page. If this isn't the right WikiProject, please let me know where I should go. Thank you! Blue Edits ( talk) 15:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Please kindly check contributions of BasedHistorian PHD ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). I reverted some edits yesterday, but not sure about standing ones. Any expertise is welcome. Thanks, A09 ( talk) 11:14, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm making a post here to see how much interest there is in organizing a collaboration event. Things like this have been helpful for other WikiProjects to encourage focused activity and to grow their active editor base. There are a lot of ways that something like this can be done, but I'm thinking something simple: invite users to contribute to topics from a certain time period and add them to the list. Women in Red has events like this every month, and it seems to work pretty well. Any thoughts? Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 16:50, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I have opened comments for Renaissance on the talk page that identifies problems with the article. If these receives no comments by monday then I will open a GAR for it. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 19:09, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
I have seen an editor inappropriately marking articles as being of top importance to all WikiProjects, including this one. Please consider reviewing Category:Top-importance history articles and adjusting its contents as you see fit. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 02:55, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
This article appears to be part of this project, but your banner is not on the talk page
(As an aside, the list appears to a history of the US since the colonization by European settlers in the 15th century. A more meaningful name may be useful) 76.14.122.5 ( talk) 02:52, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Please see here: Talk:Iraqi_conflict_(2003–present)#Requested_move_6_March_2023 FOARP ( talk) 15:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RFC on using maps and charts in Wikipedia articles. Rs chen 7754 19:04, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Talk:Isabella II of Spain#Spain's only queen regnant. You are welcome joining it.-- Thinker78 (talk) 05:19, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Deportations during the Great Depression has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 11 § Deportations during the Great Depression until a consensus is reached. 64.229.90.172 ( talk) 06:40, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
the article Stresa Front needs to be re-written and re-sourced, the sources it has are dubious and entire sections are unsourced, the article is also written in a weird third person style following Mussolini, like a novel. the article is also framed weirdly as pro-Mussolini. I am woefully underskilled to re-write and research a whole article, so I am requesting that you fine Wikiproject editors check it out. Clone commando sev ( talk) 23:32, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at
Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent
Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class=
parameter to {{
WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{ WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{
WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom
parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present.
Aymatth2 (
talk) 14:36, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
There is a proposal that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject to make changes to how surnames of early Chinese figures are defined in a particular infobox at Talk:Chinese surname#Proposal to make changes to a protected template regarding Chinese surnames. Casting a wide net after no interest from more targeted WikiProjects. Folly Mox ( talk) 03:37, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Eh... there's a stub article on this imaginary place that someone knowledgeable in NW Africa really should clean up if they can spare the time. We shouldn't completely delete it since it does show up on many many period maps, but we should make it clear that it wasn't a real thing, who the actual people in the area were, and what the actual states were during the 1600s, 1700s, and 1800s when Europeans just handwaved the region with this mangled Arabic name. — LlywelynII 14:03, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
An editor has requested for 2022 Peruvian political crisis to be moved to another page. Since you had some involvement with 2022 Peruvian political crisis, you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so).-- WMrapids ( talk) 00:48, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
An editor has requested for Operation Gideon (2020) to be moved to another page. Since you had some involvement with Operation Gideon (2020), you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so). WMrapids ( talk) 17:48, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
An editor has requested for 2019 Venezuelan uprising attempt to be moved to another page. Since you had some involvement with 2019 Venezuelan uprising attempt, you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so). WMrapids ( talk) 17:50, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
For Namibia there is a naming issue with its pre-colonial period, outlined on Talk:History of Namibia#Pre-colonial name?. I haven't got any response yet. Someone here like to help? Thanks, Pgallert ( talk) 06:09, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
History of Singapore 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. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 21:06, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Habsburg monarchy has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. User23242343 ( talk) 15:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
I am in some discussion with the major contributor to Galley about the length of the article. To me, the article seems over-long and suffers because of it. There is discussion at Talk:Galley#Length of article. This is where you will find my suggestion of splitting the article along the natural division: (a) galleys of the classical and pre-history periods (b) medieval and post-medieval galleys.
Please would editors take a look and express an opinion. Thanks, ThoughtIdRetired ( talk) 09:01, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
If anyone is interested, the Assassination of John F. Kennedy has been nominated for Featured Article promotion. Any comments would be appreciated. Thanks, ~ HAL 333 18:36, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Uranium mining in the Bancroft area has been nominated for Featured Article status. If you are interested to review the article, that would be helpful, as it needs at least one more review to avoid timing out.
Link: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Uranium mining in the Bancroft area/archive1 CT55555( talk) 12:25, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
I've been working on the article about the Victorian era a great deal this year and have recently got it to good article status. I'm hopping to get it to featured article status over the next few months which would be my first featured article. What kind of changes do you think would be needed to get their?
Link to peer review page: Wikipedia:Peer review/Victorian era/archive1 Llewee ( talk) 14:39, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
There's a discussion about moving the article Witchcraft to Witchcraft (classical) and moving Witchcraft (disambiguation) to Witchcraft instead, at Talk:Witchcraft#Requested move 19 July 2023. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 21:29, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Several nationalistic editors have added irrelevant petty lords as chief commanders in the infobox based on their personal notion that just participating in the battle is enough to include them. Not to mention that they rammed it by brute force and what seems to be tag teaming. Considering that the battle is of chief importance for Serbian history, adding some local Albanians in the infobox stinks of nationalistic editing. Because the subjects attracts a small number of editors, they might get away with it. It's so strange. I have no permission to act. Please help Wikipedia to get this mess cleaned. 178.220.230.153 ( talk) 10:59, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Renaissance 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. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 03:01, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
An RfC of possible interest to this WikiProject can be found here.
Beyond My Ken ( talk) 17:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej ( talk) 18:02, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Talk:Menologem currently has a very specific but gaping hole in its content about either how other officials were authorized to use them or how no other officials were ever authorized to use them. — LlywelynII 06:29, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:National identity#Requested move 12 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c) 08:18, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi – this seems like a very promising article on a notable subject. Not new as such, but could do with some copyedits from members of this Wikiproject if anyone is interested. Thanks 😊 GnocchiFan ( talk) 14:36, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
May I please join? Thanks, Cheaha Summit ( talk) 17:32, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi there. I do not know if there is a more appropriate area in this WikiProject for this but I want to call attention to the article Baltimore Plot, which could use the help of this project. The article covers what seems to be a mildly important historical event but suffers from a lack of sources and general need of expansion and maintenance. Please let me know if there is somewhere more appropriate for this request. Thanks, -- Lenny Marks ( talk) 15:27, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Operation Gideon (2020)#2020 Venezuelan coup attempt round III that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. WMrapids ( talk) 04:32, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, |
Anyone who is historian-minded want to evaluate where the US bombing of Korean dams in WWII is a war crime? Then, take a look at: Talk:United States war crimes#why deletion of Korean dam bombing? – ishwar (speak) 08:57, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 10#Category:Assassinated heads of government that includes historical relevance of the concept of head of government, whether viziers were heads of government, among other things. Your input is welcome. Regards, -- Thinker78 (talk) 21:46, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Does the subject of this draft satisfy academic notability? Should this draft be accepted? Robert McClenon ( talk) 05:02, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Modern era#Requested move 3 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 17:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
This seems like an important and interesting subject. Could I have some help and input on how to move forward with it? FloridaArmy ( talk) 22:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
There is a discussion on "Allied states" vs "Allied and satellite states" terminology in Template_talk:Eastern_Bloc_sidebar#Allied vs satellite states. More input would be welcome. -- Mindaur ( talk) 12:44, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
I have created a page on the subject of Nakba denial - a topic of some weight in literature on the historiography of the Arab-Israeli conflict. I have barely scratched the surface of the available source, having prioritized the most readily accessible ones. There may very well be some gaping gaps, not least in that I don't have access to any of the best Ilan Pappé material, so haven't been able to directly quote him. More eyes welcome. Iskandar323 ( talk) 19:25, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
There's a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States#History of the United States articles that may be of interest to this project. Thebiguglyalien ( talk) 00:42, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello, |
I will need help with updating the list. Please see my latest post for more details. Interstellarity ( talk) 11:40, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
I have nominated Byzantine Empire 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) 22:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
There is a merge proposal to merge The United States and the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars into History of the United States (1789–1849). The discussion is in a deadlock due to lack of input. The writer of the first article opposes the merge while I, as proposer, support the merge. More input is needed and appreciated. The Banner talk 22:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
I don't get it. Mind you, I did not edit a long time, but have things changed and I missed the memo? I asked the same question on the TP, please help with this issue. 178.220.230.153 ( talk) 16:48, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Dynasties in Chinese history#Requested move 27 October 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 17:55, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, there is a RfC regarding notability guideline for minor/rural places at this link. बिनोद थारू ( talk) 02:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
United States involvement in regime change in Latin America has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. WMrapids ( talk) 18:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
I have nominated Battle of Red Cliffs 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. a455bcd9 (Antoine) ( talk) 16:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi everyone - just letting this WikiProject know that a Peer Review of LGBT in the Ottoman Empire (with the intention of improving this to Good Article status) is currently under way. If anyone has anything to add to the article / review, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! GnocchiFan ( talk) 17:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
An editor has requested that Guayana Esequiba be moved to Guyana–Venezuela territorial dispute, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. -- WMrapids ( talk) 20:48, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
History of private equity and venture capital 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) 00:15, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested merge discussion at Talk:Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Merge_discussion that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Dan the Animator 22:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
An editor has requested that 2023 Guayana Esequiba crisis be moved to 2023 Guyana–Venezuela crisis, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion.-- WMrapids ( talk) 03:20, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
I need help scouring through Category:Fictional characters by period in order to extend Category:Fictional characters by period as far back as possibly the 4th millennium BC, which would mirror the calendar-date categories in Category:Historical fiction by period of setting and Category:Works about the future; we are going no deeper than the century level, similar to Category:People by century. I've done all of the future time periods from the 25th century onward, and other users have covered the 16th through 24th centuries and the 6th millennium.
I'm also considering combining all of the setting-by-calendar-date categories into a new category, which should smooth navigation from the past to the future. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 05:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Please review my draft Draft:Amaru Topa Inca Encyclopédisme ( talk) 04:45, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at
Talk:History of the Russian Federation#Requested move 25 December 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. –
Hilst
[talk]
16:00, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Hoysala Empire#Requested move 7 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 19:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:History (American TV network)#Requested move 6 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 19:35, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Azerbaijani-Mongolian cultural relations#Requested move 23 December 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 14:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Fools revolt#Requested move 12 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 20:49, 12 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)