This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
With the failure of the requested move at Talk:Red Tails, it seems to me that the target of the redirect Redtails comes into question. People at the film article dispute that the Tuskegee Airmen are known as the Redtails/Red Tails, so should "Redtails" redirect to the African American fliers, or should it point to the film article, or the disambiguation page? (Note: several sources were brought up at the requested move showing that the Tuskegee Airmen were indeed known by that name, at least by a few people)
70.49.124.157 ( talk) 10:03, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Complete nonsense by the anon; no one disputes that "red tails" identified the aircraft of the Tuskegee Airmen, but Red Tails is an article about a film. This is an example of Tendentious editing and a failure to Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 19:42, 29 January 2012 (UTC).
Greetings, as a WikiProject that relates to this article, this notice was sent to let you know that the article, Leon Panetta, has been nominated to be a future Collaboration of the Month article. All editors interested in voting for or improving these article are encouraged to participate. You can cast your vote here. -- Kumioko ( talk) 16:37, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject Texas on its main page has a link for Clean Up listing by category. Therein,
Orphaned Articles has a count of 377 articles. There are also almost 2,000 Texas articles that
need coordinates.
Does anyone know of bots that can do either of these tasks?
Maile66 (
talk) 12:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Conversation moved to Wikipedia Bot Requests.
Maile66 (
talk) 13:15, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:United States will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in United States's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch ( talk) 23:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated Night of the Living Dead 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. -- George Ho ( talk) 08:39, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Your opinion is solicited for an ongoing discussion on the biographies of living persons noticeboard. The discussion is in reference to the use of George W. Bush "shoeing" incident images on a number of Wikipedia articles. [link to discussion] — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 15:55, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject Conservatism cordially invites you to celebrate Ronald Reagan Day. On February 6 The Conservatism Portal will commemorate Ronald Reagan Day with a format specially designed for the holiday. The Conservatism Portal has recently been promoted to Featured Portal. – Lionel ( talk) 03:27, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
WP:WikiProject United States/WikiProject embassy will need some updates. The U.S. Roads WikiProject has formed task forces for every state and territory lacking one, and consolidated all of the existing state-level subprojects into task forces of the parent project. The exception is that the New York State routes project remains as a subproject at this time. Imzadi 1979 → 12:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luce–Celler Act of 1946. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC) -- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
United States History Project‑class | ||||||||||||||
|
United States: History Project‑class | ||||||||||
|
{{ WikiProject United States History}} and {{ WikiProject United States|UShistory=yes}} exist, should the subproject banner be merged into the main USproj banner?
70.24.247.54 ( talk) 04:38, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
I am a little surprised that the categories Category:United States counties established in xxxx, with xxxx being the year of establishment, do not already exist. As per this discussion on my talk page, I am no longer adding U.S. counties to Category:States and territories established in xxxx ( example of one of those categories). What would the community think if I created the various Category:United States counties established in xxxx categories and categorized each U.S. county appropriately?
Please let me know if I need to clarify. Thanks! -- Andrew (User:90) (talk) 22:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Many articles in the xxxx in the United States series ( example) are all jumbled up at the bottom because someone has used the {{Div col}} template for the birth and death sections without closing it. Our two options for fixing this are (1) close each instance of {{Div col}} or (2) remove each instance of {{Div col}}. Since there are only a couple items in each list, I propose we remove {{Div col}} entirely from these sections. Would anyone object to that?
Note: {{Div col}} is a template used to make a list show up in multiple columns instead of just one. It generally is not used unless there are a lot of items in the list. -- Andrew (User:90) (talk) 22:39, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Do you Support or Oppose including this article and adding the WPUS banner? – Lionel ( talk) 02:06, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Do you Support or Oppose including this article and adding the WPUS banner?– Lionel ( talk) 02:13, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Do you Support or Oppose including this article and adding the WPUS banner?– Lionel ( talk) 02:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Are not good examples to dispute over. If you want to dispute over an example chose something solely CT related.
These four are all then suitable for other geographical based projects than CT.
Rich
Farmbrough, 21:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC).
This is a fascinating legal case, anyone want to collaborate on improving the page with me? Please leave a note on my user talk page, — Cirt ( talk) 18:22, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
It seems that as of late the prevailing argument is that this project has become too big and the community has stated and continues to state that themembers of the project cannot dictate their scope nor tag articles they feel are in it. My bots tasks has been revoked which also means that the collaboration and Newsletter will stop because I simply don't have time to maintain those and manually do all the things the project needs. Weve done a lot of great work and we have come along way but I wanted to leave this message for those that might be watching that its very likely that the community will force us very soon to break apart. This means that each individual project that is supported by WPUS and makes up the common community will revert back into individual projects and that if a lwer echelon tag (such as a state tag) exists we won't be able to tag that article. This also means that the states can't tag the city articles and so on. So this means that this project will not be allowed to tag very much because almost all articles fall into one or more of the 100+ US related projects. -- Kumioko ( talk) 16:27, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Relevant guideliens from Wikiproject guide and its subpage:
WikiProjects have sole and absolute authority to define their scopes
A group of editors cannot be forced to support any article that they do not wish to support, or prohibited from supporting any article that they wish to support
No project can control another project or other editor: No project can demand that another project support an article, change its scope, quit working on an article.
Only this group of editors decides on its scope, what articles are included, and what articles are excluded. If there is a consensus to add an article, removal of the banner is disruptive and a violation or WP:EW. Editors removing banners must be informed of the group consensus and warned to cease. Editors edit warring against project consensus should be reported for WP:ER or WP:ANI as appropriate. – Lionel ( talk) 02:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Regarding LOCALCONSENSUS, it appears to contradict the proj guide. Before any "wider community" attempts to change the scope of this wikiproject, the wikilawyers will have to hash it out. That said, "sole and absolute authority" is extremely strong phrasing, and disregarding this should not be done lightly. In addition, the concept behind wikiprojects is that they are a group of people, and the community in the past has allowed these groups to be self-directing and to the extent possible, autonomous. For "outsiders" to meddle in the minutiae of these groups would seriously undermine all wikiprojects. – Lionel ( talk) 23:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
For those who may be considering picking up the pieces I left scattered around and keep this project going the following might be helpful. In response to my misguided view that a WikiProject should be able to tag the articles in its scope without other editors and projects showing ownswership over them. Perhaps I was a bit overzealous in my tagging but but it was to ensure that content with no or sole project support would not be left abandoned or to rot. If content is not tagged with a project banner then you have only categories in which to do maintenance on the related articles or content. Since much of the content doesn't have categories, or because the category structure is prohibitively hard to work with and use with an almost endless supply of problems associated with them, using categorization to run a project isn't an efficient way to conduct WikiProject Business. Additionally, bot notifications such as Popular pages, featured content and article alerts doesn't work with categories alone. THEY MUST be tagged with a project banner in order to work. If you fix that problem then my overzealous tagging would not be as needed. Perhaps instead of using Category:WikiProject United States articles to display the 200+ thousand articles we could simply allow the input of hundreds or thousands of categories instead for these tools/bots to work. It seems like that might be more efficiant (sorry for the sarcastic comment here. Its intended to be somwhat humorous while pointing to a problem). The above comment, I think covers why I think they should be tagged but I will clarify, Its so that the article or other content is covered and counted by the project so that the project will be notified/counted if it is promoted, deleted, moved or submitted for something like reviews or discussions. In addition, here is a quick run down of why I was doing what I was doing:
As with many things these were all a work in progress and I was refining things as I went. Additionally there were overlaps between items. I hope this helps to explain what I was doing, and why and what I won't be doing in the future. Good Luck. -- Kumioko ( talk) 15:36, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Do you Support or Oppose including this article and adding the WPUS banner?– Lionel ( talk) 02:13, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
I just wanted to leave a quick note that there will be no more newsletter or updates to the monthly collaboration due to the prevailing community consensus to immediately stop support, maintenance and expansion of this project. -- Kumioko ( talk) 11:55, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
There is a HUGE number of articles in Category:Cycling in the United States but there is no Cycling in the United States article. -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 03:14, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Based on the comments from WikiProject Montana and WikiProject Florida, which they opposed it, I would suggest to split into few projects since it has a activity and some would remain to be part of WikiProject United States. JJ98 ( Talk / Contributions) 21:18, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Maile66 ( talk) 22:50, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, United States has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the good article reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Cambalachero ( talk) 18:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject Kentucky includes an Eastern Mountain Coal Fields task force that has tags on a number of articles related to that region of Kentucky. Now that the state Wikiproject has been subsumed into this one, the task force information no longer appears on talk pages for those articles. The information does appear in the template for the US Wikiproject, though. What would it take to restore it to the template display? -- Orlady ( talk) 18:45, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
|Coal-fields=
or the alternate seen in the documentation
here or add that parameter alias to the Template code and implement it. --
Kumioko (
talk) 18:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Well, I'm an administrator, and I'd be happy to edit that template, but I don't know how to fix the problems there. It's not exactly obvious how to fix issues in code as complex as what's in that template. -- Orlady ( talk) 00:45, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
|tf 3 = {{{Coal-fields|{{{KY-coal|}}}}}}
I've just scrubbed the member lists of all users who are subject to long term blocks. There are a few things that could make these lists easier to manage so that bots aren't sending newsletters to users who aren't reading them, leading to the odd situation where one bot is filling up talk pages and another is archiving them, month after month, for no good reason.
Just some thoughts aimed at helping make this easier to manage and avoid wasting resources. Beeblebrox ( talk) 02:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Or you could have people subscribe to the newsletter. That is how I have seen a number of projects do it. I know a lot of people don't like getting such things unless they specifically ask to get them. -
DJSasso (
talk) 13:54, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
I would suggest one more thing about member lists:
I have nominated Frederick_Russell_Burnham 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. Nikkimaria ( talk) 14:03, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
I have begun the procedure for beginning the project by making the proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. To add your name to support the proposal go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Occupy movement.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 23:13, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello guys, there has been a discussion on the Geographical coordinates project which led to the development of a new scheme to add line and outline data to applicable Wikipedia articles. I've been working on a bot to add KML outline data to each US county. These outlines would show up as an area highlight (click the blue globe in the top right of Los Alamos County, New Mexico for an example) and links to Google Maps and Bing Maps can be displayed with the county outline as an overlay. I'm sure you can provide further insight and ideas on the GeoProject discussion page, and you might leave a comment or two at my bot request page for the county job at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/DschwenBot. Thanks! -- Dschwen 21:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Category:African-American people, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 13:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Haymarket affair, which is listed as part of this WikiProject, has been nominated for a community reassessment to determine if it meets the good article criteria and so can be listed as a good article. Please add comments to the article reassessment page. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 19:48, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Asian American#Infobox Image discussion 2012. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 18:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#Immigration status. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 17:41, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
These sentences don't make sense:
In 1764, Gilpin purchased 39 acres of land much of which is located in and around present day Millington, MD. Millington was then known as Head of Chester considering the As a member of the American Philosophical Society, Gilpin was involved with planning a possible waterway that would be a shortcut for shipping from the Chesapeake Bay to the City of Philadelphia.
I suspect that someone made an editing error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.242.86.145 ( talk) 12:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Philippines Campaign (1944–1945)#Emphasis on British. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 21:27, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on a merge at Talk:Radio y Televisión Martí. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 06:12, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
I recommend that you send out the March newsletter. A remembrance of your (I'm a non-member) former members contributions would be most fitting. Also a call for volunteers would be a good idea. If someone writes it here Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/Newsletter/March 2012 I can send it out with Edwardsbot. Let's not let him fade away into oblivion without thanks from the group he loved. – Lionel ( talk) 08:31, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I am creating a new Wikipedia article titled “Second Generation Immigrants in the United States.” On the project page it states that one of the project’s primary aims is to add knowledge to Wikipedia concerning subjects that are of national significance. In the U.S. Census Bureau press release of October 2010, it states that as of 2009 11% of the US population is a second generation immigrant. The population of second generation immigrants in this country is increasingly becoming a national concern in term of policies. As more and more US citizens are born with at least one foreign born parent, this percentage will surely increase. Thus, the voice of second generation immigrants will gain power through numbers. Also, since the majority of second generation immigrants are of minority status, their growing numbers can be used to advocate minority rights and demand governmental action. I plan on including various statistical data showing education and income levels obtained by second generation immigrants, along with information on theories of assimilation, as how these children are assimilated into society can have a huge impact on future economic successes and therefore on the overall developmental progression of the nation. Is there any other type of information that I should focus on in the creation of this article that would further promote the goals of this Wikiproject? I would greatly appreciate any suggestions you may have. Thank you. Marymorales291 ( talk) 04:03, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
I am creating an entry on "Human Trafficking in Houston, Texas" which will specifically explore the types of trafficking found in the city as well as the city's characteristics, legally and culturally, which make the city a popular hub for trafficking in the United States. There are pages created for Human Trafficking and Contemporary Slavery, but there are not sections designated specifically for Houston. Even on the page for Houston, Texas, where other crimes are listed, human trafficking is not. I plan to edit the page "Slavery in the United states" and add a section about the contemporary slavery issues in Houston today. Are there any objections to this? Right now the page is concerned with slavery in the colonial America up until the Civil War, my edits would add information of a very different time period and type of slavery. Amacune ( talk) 22:18, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
For discussion on whether to merge the History of the Hmong in Merced, California, please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Asian_Americans#History_of_the_Hmong_in_Merced.2C_California WhisperToMe ( talk) 18:05, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
For Women's History Month, I created List of First Ladies and Gentlemen of Texas and an accompanying Navbox. It's an area that has slipped through the cracks in Wikipedia. Photos are needed, as are individual pages. While all the presidents of the Republic, and the Governors of the state, have had individual articles created, most of the First Ladies of Texas have not, becoming neglected footnotes in history as names married to important persons. The state's only First Gentleman - James E. Ferguson - has his own page, but only because he was first a Governor. Any help anyone would care to give would be welcome. Maile66 ( talk) 20:15, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Under "Other" above, it cites "Spanish land grants" in California and historic Mexico. I didn't want to just arbitrarily delete that, but the subject matter seems to have been covered in Spanish land grants in California (redirect to Ranchos of California) and Spanish land grants in New Mexico. Maile66 ( talk) 22:06, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
The article needs some work. It presents a lot of claims by conspiracy proponents as is and gives them undue weight to a fringe position among historical academics. On the talk page we're also discussing what can count as a reliable source. At least I recommend adding the page to your watchlist. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 01:56, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I hope those with an interest in WW2 or military history consider looking at the Western Betrayal article which as it stands now is largely aimed at blaming America and Britain for everything that went wrong in Europe from 1939 on. Can anyone write an alternative POV or neutralize the whole article such that British and American perspectives are given some currency? Pultusk ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:32, 2 April 2012 (UTC).
Wikipedia:HighBeam details a limited opportunity for experienced Wikipedia editors to have free access to HighBeam Research, an invaluable resource for locating reliable sources for articles and content related to the United States as well as other subjects.-- JayJasper ( talk) 18:50, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
I realize that Kumioko is gone but don't let this project die because one user has left. 71.163.243.232 ( talk) 14:24, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Many articles on cities in the United States were originally created with a bot from U.S. census data, and then expanded by individual editors. I think it would be worthwhile to create articles on all populated places in the United States for which articles do not already exist using the data available from the Geographic Names Information System and perhaps from other reliable sources, such as post office records and state geographical names agencies, so that editors wanting to add information about a particular unincorporated community could have a stub to start from. The information from GNIS is enough to create a respectable stub article on each place. See West Virginia Central Junction, West Virginia for an article that I created only from GNIS data, and Mooselookmeguntic, Maine and Olema, Washington for articles that I created with GNIS data and other references.
I don't have the programming skills to create a bot to do this, but I'm hoping someone else will. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 01:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
There are more than 80K unassessed articles about US. I had a idea to start a contest regarding Assessment.
I thought that United States has a good number of articles now and needs clean up.
This will be beneficial for articles as well as editors as they will be able to interact with editors in their country and will learn new things and can obtain a lot of knowledge about their country.
Please add your name here if you want to take part in this contest: [1] and [2]
Details: [3]
Instructions: [4]
Awards to be given: [5]
Work that is to be done can be viewed here: [6]
Regards! Yash t 101 08:06, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Thor Hesla might be borderline notable, even though the article has been nominated for deletion.
Is he notable for anything that has not been mentioned in the article?
(He is probably not notable only for being a victim of a terrorist attack.) -- Sywoofer ( talk) 08:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
I have proposed a split for "History" section because some are concerned about length of the section. I have posted this message for hopes of coming into Talk:Social Security (United States). -- George Ho ( talk) 03:29, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
I have created a task force proposal for television show Cheers at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Cheers. Come there for discussion. -- George Ho ( talk) 04:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Jim Yong Kim is currently rated as high importance, is that right? Seems like a president of the World Bank isn't all that important to the US. 70.49.124.225 ( talk) 05:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
In addition to the tag and assess drive suggested last week WikiProject Military history is looking for editors to help them do B-Class assessments to the 24,000+ articles that need it for their project. I'll try to knock out some while I have the time, but clearing out this category might go faster with some help. I noticed that a huge number of these articles also related to WPUS or one of the supported projects so I thought some members of this project might be interested. 138.162.8.57 ( talk) 18:54, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Some articles have fallen back into the unassessed categories when a second state template was converted to the US template instead of merging. I found those when checking the assessment log for articles going eg from stub to unknown. It is worth keeping an eye on the log, but I am sure there are a number of older cases like this and it be more worthwhile to set a bot at this to untangle to straitforward cases. Agathoclea ( talk) 05:37, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
This proposal relates to copyrights. Feel free to discuss. -- George Ho ( talk) 17:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
The project banner for United States Senate election in Connecticut, 2012 was reverted as not in scope for our project. See also the reverters reasoning at User talk:Agathoclea#United States Senate election in Connecticut, 2012. I said I will refer it to the project page to decide if the article is in scope or not. Agathoclea ( talk) 13:54, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
(editconflict) We are actually digressing and arguing with an outsider - the real issue why I brought this here is do the members of the project feel the article is in scope or not. Anybody else cares to comment? c ( talk) 15:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately the truth of the matter is that until about a year and a half ago this project was defunct and a good number of the 100+ US related projects (you can see them in the Embassy tab) were defunct or inactive as well. When I started to rebuild and revive this project in the hopes of also reviving some of the others and providing a core project from which to help support these projects and the articles in them several projects and editors felt that it was a hostile takeover. Its been a back and forth since then, with Mark currently taking the lead in defending his little corner of the Wiki from the Evils of Kumioko and WPUS. Contrary to what some may try and get others to believe I have never, and never had the intention too, take over any project. Particularly not those that didn't want any. I do however think that any project has the right to add their tag to any article they feel is in their scope. In the past, with only a couple exceptions, if even one editor in a project opposed being supported by WPUS I didn't add them or added them to the joint projects list. There have even been a few cases where they said yes (or didn't reply at all) and then later changed their mind and were removed. Kumioko ( talk) 15:15, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
I just know I'm going to regret weighing in on this, having observed a tiny portion of the previous drama at a distance, but as to the instant case, I absolutely think any federal election falls within the intended scope of this project. Yes, it is a state election, but it is for a federal office, and any single state election can potentially have a dramatic effect on the balance of power in the entire chamber and Congress. (See Scott Brown's election to the Senate from Massachusetts.)
As to the larger point about what projects tag what articles, I'm bumfuzzled as to why so much energy has been devoted to it. The banners take up so little screen real estate, especially with the advent of the banner shell, that I can't imagine why it is worth all this to keep another banner off. To use the hyperbolic analogy I'm seeing thrown around, if someone created a WikiProject Milky Way and tagged every article in my Governors of Kentucky pet project, my level of concern would be somewhere between infintesimally small and non-existent. How is it that big a deal? It might be one extra turn on a scroll wheel. I don't get it. Acdixon ( talk · contribs) 15:54, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
I have created the Family planning in the United States and Birth control in the United States article to fill gaps and as a tidy up of Family planning. The articles need work. I am no expert on these topics. -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 10:29, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
We have the page meta:Consejo de las secciones estadounidenses de Wikimedia on Meta for speakers of Spanish. It is a Spanish-language version of the page meta:Wikimedia United States Chapters Council WhisperToMe ( talk) 04:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
I had an idea that I think will benefit not only WikiProject United States but the supported projects as well. I am working on refining the logic in Template:WikiProject United States to favor at least some of the individual projects over the umbrella United States project. What this would do, if I can get it to work at all, is to display the individual project (Arizona for example) as the primary project with United States in the lower supported project role when applicable. This would give the individual project more influence and prominence on the article while still allowing the use of one template, still alowing the articles and other content to be tracked across multiple project categories (United States and Arizona for example) and I think give more emphasis where its due. I'm not even sure if I can get this to work but my preliminary attempts at Template:WikiProject United States/Arizona indicate that its possible. Does anyone have any thoughts, ideas or suggestins on this idea? Kumioko ( talk) 19:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
There is a discussion over here on what food might best represent American cuisine. Please come offer your opinions. Thanks! ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Quick question: are the individual state WP templates supposed to be replaced by the standard WP US template, with links to the individual state projects? 76.7.224.171 ( talk) 03:29, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
I know this was recently suggested as a drive but I am going to throw it out here again for anyone interested. We seem to have built up a substantial backlog in articles that need to be assessed or given an importance to the project(s). I have been and will continue to chip away at this over the next couple of weeks as I find the time. It appears others are working this as well and that is appreciated. If anyone else wants to pitch in and do a few assessments for the US related project thats nearest to your heart your assistance would be greatly appreciated. I have added these below the assessment table on the main project page but below are a couple of progress bars just to help give a face to the problem and the progress.
Click on [show] for progress bar for Unassessed United States articles
| |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Click on [show] for progress bar for Unknown-importance United States articles
| |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Kumioko ( talk) 19:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
I have recently made major revisions to the Sawtooth National Forest page. I think that with some review and revision this article will qualify for FA status. I also think that this forest may have the most comprehensive coverage (including all linked pages about forest features) of any U.S. National Forest, and perhaps any protected area. Feel free to make grammatical and formatting changes, but before adding, removing, and changing content I would like to hear about the changes. Fredlyfish4 ( talk) 21:28, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Other than whats listed above here are a couple of things I recommend:
Aside from these mostly stylistic and nitpicky things great job it looks like a really well written article. Kumioko ( talk) 01:57, 12 May 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the help folks. I've been working on making changes per your suggestions. Fredlyfish4 ( talk) 01:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
A discussion has been opened on the talk page of the battleship USS Missouri (BB-63) centered on the issue of whether or not to include a mention of battleship's appearance in the music video If I Could Turn Back Time, all interested editors are welcome to participate.
70.24.251.208 ( talk) 05:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
FYI Citigroup Center has been requested to be renamed. See talk:Citigroup Center; as one of the iconic buildings of an American skyline, you might want to know. 70.24.251.208 ( talk) 03:42, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated List of signers of the United States Constitution for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harrias ( talk • contribs) 14:04, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Specifically, Talk:List of Tea Party politicians#Post-AfD clarification and possible slimming down. Input would be much appreciated. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 14:50, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
In Talk:United_States_Senate_election_in_Massachusetts,_2012#Polling_order, we are having a dispute concerning whether polls should be listed in chronological or reverse-chronological order. I would appreciate any outside input from the broader group of editors who contribute to these articles. Thanks! johnpseudo 16:16, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
I had a question about the WikiProjects supported by the WPUS banner. I see that certain states are supported by the banner but not all. Why are all 50 states not covered? 64.6.124.31 ( talk) 19:11, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Here is some grist featuring depth of project scope rather than allocation to supported state and city projects.
Each row concerns one article, listed first, that I used last hour for exhibit in "Five cents on list chronological order" (re #Polling order on another talk page [7]). None of the three is now in WikiProject US. The second and third listings are less general and more general parents of the exhibit article. Bold marks those now in WikiProject US. Major League Baseball is based in the U.S. but operates regularly in North American and the Caribbean with one member ballclub in Toronto. ALSC is one division of the American Library Association. BRS, ALA, and NBF are private organizations, not government. There seems to be principle or two in operation here. -- P64 ( talk) 16:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated American Civil War for a reassessment of its Good Article status due to its extreme length. (see Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/American_Civil_War/2) Please comment as this is a community reassessment. Quarkgluonsoup ( talk) 21:40, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Kumioko,
I just ran across this: Talk:Jim Garrison, and think you might want to look at the page. Something seems to be off, and it looks like you were the last one to edit the banner. Maile66 ( talk) 22:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
The first version of a report on the use of self-published sources is now available, in Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia reliability. Some of the self-published sources listed in the report pertain to this project.
Suggestions on the report itself (a discussion has started here), and help in remedying the use of the self-published items that relate to this project will be appreciated. History2007 ( talk) 06:16, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
An article from this project is nominated for Featured Article status: Smith Act trials of Communist Party leaders. To assist the process, visit its FA review page to add comments, or register support/oppose sentiments. Cheers. -- Noleander ( talk) 00:05, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
WP:KY has this page, updated by AAlertBot, that tells when any of the project's articles enter a review workflow (GA, FA, PR, ACR, etc.) Do we have this for WP:US? Should we? Could give folks looking for something to review a place to start. Acdixon ( talk · contribs) 14:02, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
There is a discussion ongoing at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Barack Obama/archive9 Lihaas ( talk) 16:30, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia article = Pleasant Valley War.
A good source of information on the Pleasant Valley Cattle War is the book, "Oxen to Oxides," by John Fletcher "Fletch" Fairchild, who was born in 1897. This book exists only as a typed manuscript (as of June 2012). Fletch Fairchild recounts the stories told to him about this Graham-Tewksbury feud. His book greatly elaborates as to how the feud began, particularly the role played by the Daggs Brothers. He recounts the story of the first white man killed in the feud, as well as two prior incidents where men were killed PRIOR to the shooting of John Tewksbury and William Jacobs.
A copy of this book is in the Sedona Heritage Museum, Sedona, Arizona.
The article's title should be changed from Pleasant Valley War to Pleasant Valley Cattle War, which is what he called it and he knows how the locals referred to it, because he was there. My two cents.
Forrest747 ( talk) 03:57, 15 June 2012 (UTC) submitted by forrest747
Is the WikiProject US logo even eligible for copyright protection? It's just simple geometry. (You could have an unregistered trademark on it and license the trademark under CC-BY-SA.) 68.173.113.106 ( talk) 23:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
The US National Archives WikiProject seeks a coordinator to help reboot the project and work on new initiatives! The role is modeled after other Wikiproject coordinators, like the WikiProject Military History coordinators. The coordinator will work with the Wikipedian in Residence to organize and increase participation in the WikiProject, with the goal that the WikiProject is an active space for collaboration maintained by and for the Wikipedia editors, rather than the National Archives.
Please see the full information at Wikipedia:GLAM/NARA/Coordinator. Feel free to pass this note along to any interested parties. Thanks! Dominic· t 16:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
The Future section at
Politics of Texas has been blanked 4 times since 2 June 2012. Interested editors are invited to comment on this issue at
Future section discussion.
In response to a posting at
WikiProject_Texas,
User:Maile66 suggested posting a notice here for increased visibility and
said that he had requested temporary page protection.
SBaker43 (
talk) 17:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
An earlier requested-move survey generated lots of controversy and an arbitration case. Therefore, this one is being posted here and in many other places, to gather a very wide range of opinions outside of the Scotland and Australia WikiProjects. |
A requested move survey was started at Talk:Perth_(disambiguation)#Requested_move, which proposes to move:
Background: There was a previous requested-move survey which ran from late May to mid June. There was a great deal of controversy surrounding the closure and subsequent events, which involved a number of reverts and re-reverts which are the subject of an ongoing arbitration case; there was also a move review process. — P.T. Aufrette ( talk) 04:09, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Michelle Rhee#Relation of subject to Paul Scott. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 10:12, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Template:United States, a redirect to Template:United States political divisions, is being discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion#Template:United States. Your views would be most welcome in that discussion. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
We are doing great so far on the assessments for the project. Not only have we dropped from 28, 647 articles needing assessment to below 16, 700 (representing about 42% complete, we also dropped from 73, 309 articles lacking importance to below 36, 000 (representing 50.9% complete). At the same time we added about 27, 000 pieces of content and several projects so great job for those that are working on this.
Many of you are focusing on specific projects so this progress bar chart will not truly reflect your efforts but the chart below does give an idea where the project as a whole stands.
Click on [show] for progress bar for the Unassessed United States articles
| |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Click on [show] for progress bar for the Unknown-importance United States articles
| |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Again great job. Kumioko ( talk) 18:24, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure where to ask this, so I'll float it here and we'll see how it goes. On what seems like hundreds of thousands of articles on Wikipedia about United States local municipalities (cities, townships, counties), there are demographic blurbs. They were predominantly taken from the 2000 Census, and there is an incomplete effort to transition this to 2010 Census information. I am particularly interested in the median household/family income data. Where was this drawn from, and what's being done to update it for 2010? Is income even something that the Census measures, or is that handled separately by the American Community Survey? I think some effort at consistency here is worth thinking through. What source was used for the 2000 median income information? MrArticleOne ( talk) 14:36, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
The historic Daisy ad helped Lyndon Johnson win a landslide over Barry Goldwater in 1964 and is an important turning point in political and advertising history. The entire full length video is up for Featured Picture! Click here to check it out. – Lionel ( talk) 09:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
See discussion on whether to include the alternate colloquial name of "nigger goose", currently disputed. go to Talk:Double-crested_Cormorant#Inclusion_of_colloquial_name_.22nigger_goose.22 Casliber ( talk · contribs) 00:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Filipino American#Lack of images. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 23:52, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Americans#NON WHITE HISPANICS(SOME OTHER RACE) or HISPANICS SECTION. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:00, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Venus Williams won gold in tennis singles, not Serena — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.64.145.190 ( talk) 02:18, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
This is an invitation to "United States" members to comment on my proposal for a "Westerns" WikiProject to deal specifically with articles regarding Western movies and Western TV series', major Western actors, directors and people involved in this vast genre over the past century. This is for the fictional Wild West – such as Hollywood's re-imagining of the Old West – so not a historical project. Comments, ideas and further support appreciated. Thanks. — Ma®©usBritish[ chat 12:24, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Westerns
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Barack Obama#Article idea. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
FYI Talk:Missy Franklin is currently discussing issues concerning people with dual citizenships, in this case, Canada and USA -- 70.50.151.36 ( talk) 08:04, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Military history of the United States. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 16:35, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
I want to know more about the documentary I saw on Animal Planet. It was extremely moving, but not quite convincing to me,although,I believe anything is possible. I would like to know if the scientists from NOAA are legit, or is this just another way to invite fallacies into everyone's heads? I firmly believe the government will go towards any lengths to dispell this is true. I also believe that it may "tie into" alien intiatives within the ocean environment. Is there a connection,or is it a separate issue altogether? SOS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lori anthos ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
What's this business of WikiProject United States taking over all the state wikiprojects? This is inane. I've been actively working under the auspices of the WikiProject Rhode Island, and then it gets sucked up into some big meaningless conglomerate. This is a corporate takeover. Come on folks, what's next? WikiPrjoect Wikipedia? Wikiproject World? I would like to be working within a wikiproject that is limited in scope and meaningful. Please return Rhode Island to its own wikiproject! Sarnold17 ( talk) 09:26, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Since you raised several points I am going to respond to each separately as bulleted below. Please let me know if I missed any:
As with Ed I think that the Rhode Island project and its articles gains more from the WPUS support than it lost in its banner but I hope this helps to explain things a little. Kumioko ( talk) 14:37, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
I had to ask for help on this one but take a look at this.
I think adding the extra block of color is a little much but this will allow the supported projects importance to be much more prominant and visible compared to WikiProject United States. Let me know what you think. Kumioko ( talk) 23:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm coming to this really late, but are the importance ratings really needed? They're extremely subjective, and Milhist gets along just fine without them (possibly even better, with no importance-related disputes!). Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Is there any particular reason why this project doesn't have a collaboration with WikiProject Florida? I mean, it would make sense if two project collaborated. Steel1943 ( talk) 02:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
The quest for getting Wikipedia editors the sources they need for articles related to the United States and other subjects is gaining momentum. Here's what's happening and what you can sign up for right now:
In addition to these great partnerships, you might be interested in the next-generation idea to create a central Wikipedia Library where approved editors would have access to all participating resource donors. It's still in the preliminary stages, but if you like the idea, add your feedback to the Community Fellowship proposal to start developing the project. Drop by the talk page of User:Ocaasi, who is overseeing these projects, if you have any questions.-- JayJasper ( talk) 17:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
List of United States Presidential autobiographies. I created this article, but no one seems to be editing or improving it, which is disappointing considering that this article has a great purpose. Thank you. Futurist110 ( talk) 01:05, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't know if this has been discussed before, but this has been bugging me for quite some time. The colors on the svg file of the US Flag look faded like they were left in the sun for too long rather than the colors that are found on a flag in good shape. Are we 100% sure the source used gave us the right colors? (I do take notice it could just be my monitor, however after calibrating it several times, I don't think it is.) CRRays Head90 | Get Some! 14:07, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Kumioko, I think you might have some ideas about this. It involves all the references for articles for Louisiana made by (blocked) editor Billy Hathorn. Big problem with this. His method of referencing was to slap bare urls all - now mostly dead links - over everything. He did over 100,000 edits in Texas and Louisiana, and who knows where else. But this post is strictly about his Louisiana dead link bare urls. I created Louisiana Center for Women and Government Hall of Fame and, naturally, looked for any pre-created matching articles for the individual entries in the table. And I was wondering why everything in Louisiana was in such poor shape, dead bare urls all over the place. Louisiana politics was Billy's bailiwick. Because the pre-existing article Louisiana Political Museum and Hall of Fame, was not in a sortable I could use, I reworked it inserting 100 references of my own. Again, that article and related articles were Billy's work, in whole or in part. Dead bare urls all over Wikipedia. I've been looking over at the WikiProject Louisiana, and I think it might not be active. My question: is it feasible that a bot could be created to zap through the Billy Hathorne related articles in Louisiana and catch those bare urls? I suspect it would involve many, many articles. But those articles look like trash the way they are now. Also, one of the reasons Billy got banned was apparently copyvio, complete copy and paste. Big problem. Got any ideas how to clean up Louisiana? Maile66 ( talk) 00:29, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, it's not particularly well worded for non-userpages, but yeah, this WikiProject is now setup and still in the early stages of building its project area before user-participation can really begin to function. Anyone interested, please feel free to join. Note, this project not only covers film and TV, but Western novels, comics, actors, directors and authors, etc who make the fictional-Wild West possible. Thanks, Ma®©usBritish{ chat} 01:32, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Jorge Otero Barreto#Most decorated. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 05:21, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
There has been some discussion on my talk page in the last few days about getting an A-Class review process going for WikiProject United States. There are a few of us already interested but I wanted to start a discussion here to give the rest of the project a chance to comment before building the infrastructure. Does anyone have any opinion about this project developing an A-Class review process? Here are a few thoughts I have about it:
Please let us know if you have any questions or comments about this proposal. Kumioko ( talk) 23:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
The banner already includes (or should do so) the flag for A-class, so stay withing the banner I say. But like with GA and FA it should also be in the article milestones template. A-Class is usually considered better than GA AFAIR. Agathoclea ( talk) 12:11, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately after 10 days we have only had a couple folks comment. For something like this to work I think it would need more than a couple editors and it just doesn't seem like we have enough support for something like this at this time. Kumioko ( talk) 02:05, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated Apollo program for a GA review. JustinTime55 ( talk) 18:13, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Given the amount of material involved with this project, I think maybe having some sort of newsletter, maybe like the MILHIST Bugle, might be useful. I kinda keep the current Christianity newsletter going, so I know a little about getting one together theoretically if not necessarily artistically. But something of the type might be useful in maybe getting some more people more actively involved. Any opinions, and, if yes, any specific ideas as to how it should look, what it should include, that sort of thing? John Carter ( talk) 18:33, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Input is needed at an RfC regarding tea party: Talk:List_of_Tea_Party_politicians#RfC:_What_is_criterion_for_inclusion_in_this_list.3F. -- Noleander ( talk) 18:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
A discussion on the encyclopedic need for the use of military dates on United States military related articles is taking place at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Proposal to strike out the requirement that American military articles use military dates. Please join in.-- JOJ Hutton 23:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello. I've been creating American diplomat articles for a while now, and I hope this is the appropriate place to request a peer-review of some of my articles. I really can't discern between start-class and stub-class, B-class and C-class, etc., and I hope that some more experienced editors can accurately grade these articles. When I made most of them, I mass-included the {{us-diplomat-stub}} template, and many now seem to be of start or C class or better (like Chad and Marshall Islands, contrast Togo/others). Thanks in advance. (Note: Many also may require certain tags and refs filled in, etc.) All of these except for William Bodde, Jr. and Edward W. Mulcahy (start-class) are currently listed as stubs.
I originally intended to go to WP:Biography, but I figured this is more relevant to the United States (diplomacy). Again, I would greatly appreciate any peer-review classing/article improvements.
Royal
Mate1 22:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Деми Ловато, ديمي لوفاتو, دمی لواتو, Деметриа Девонн Ловато, Деметрия Девонн Ловато. Since you had some involvement with the Demi Lovato redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). -- 76.65.128.252 ( talk) 10:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:RightCowLeftCoast reported by User:MastCell (Result: ). RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 19:59, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
While making this template, I was surprised by how many of these articles do not exist. Savidan 20:21, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Barack Obama#Films. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:30, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Voorhees College, founded in 1897, is a historically black college. It is omitted in the city of Denmark, SC listing.
Additionally, Denmark Technical College was also omitted under Denmark, SC. Charles3rd ( talk) 21:16, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
File:Samuel Phillips Lee.jpg has been nominated for immediate deletion as being unsourced -- 14:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.128.252 ( talk)
file:Usgreatseal.png has been nominated for deletion as being unsourced -- 76.65.128.252 ( talk) 14:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
file:Henry-E-Erwin.png has been nominated for deletion as being unsourced -- 76.65.128.252 ( talk) 14:50, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Currently
Template:WikiProject United States has logic to create a category for articles that have or do not have |listas=
. This parameter is used to help sort the article into the correct order in categories but in many cases its not needed because other projects, like WikiProject Biography already have it and that sort applies to any of the other projects listed. So, what I have suggested is to eliminate the category for United States articles without the listas parameter and just have it for those with the parameter.
On the request, the admin folks said I needed to leave a note on the project discussing the change. So here are a couple questions relating to the task:
Please let me know if you have any other suggestions. Kumioko ( talk) 12:53, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Someone has suggested using Future-Class for the project to identify the articles that are of a future tense such as the upcoming elections. Does anyone have any comments about doing this? Kumioko ( talk) 23:58, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
I just looked and there are only a handfull that I can find directly that would apply. Here are a couple:
I just wanted to get an idea. I tend to agree with Imzadi actually that it really wouldn't be that much effort but its fine with me either way. Kumioko ( talk) 03:33, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
With the failure of the requested move at Talk:Red Tails, it seems to me that the target of the redirect Redtails comes into question. People at the film article dispute that the Tuskegee Airmen are known as the Redtails/Red Tails, so should "Redtails" redirect to the African American fliers, or should it point to the film article, or the disambiguation page? (Note: several sources were brought up at the requested move showing that the Tuskegee Airmen were indeed known by that name, at least by a few people)
70.49.124.157 ( talk) 10:03, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Complete nonsense by the anon; no one disputes that "red tails" identified the aircraft of the Tuskegee Airmen, but Red Tails is an article about a film. This is an example of Tendentious editing and a failure to Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 19:42, 29 January 2012 (UTC).
Greetings, as a WikiProject that relates to this article, this notice was sent to let you know that the article, Leon Panetta, has been nominated to be a future Collaboration of the Month article. All editors interested in voting for or improving these article are encouraged to participate. You can cast your vote here. -- Kumioko ( talk) 16:37, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject Texas on its main page has a link for Clean Up listing by category. Therein,
Orphaned Articles has a count of 377 articles. There are also almost 2,000 Texas articles that
need coordinates.
Does anyone know of bots that can do either of these tasks?
Maile66 (
talk) 12:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC) Conversation moved to Wikipedia Bot Requests.
Maile66 (
talk) 13:15, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:United States will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in United States's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch ( talk) 23:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated Night of the Living Dead 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. -- George Ho ( talk) 08:39, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Your opinion is solicited for an ongoing discussion on the biographies of living persons noticeboard. The discussion is in reference to the use of George W. Bush "shoeing" incident images on a number of Wikipedia articles. [link to discussion] — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 15:55, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject Conservatism cordially invites you to celebrate Ronald Reagan Day. On February 6 The Conservatism Portal will commemorate Ronald Reagan Day with a format specially designed for the holiday. The Conservatism Portal has recently been promoted to Featured Portal. – Lionel ( talk) 03:27, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
WP:WikiProject United States/WikiProject embassy will need some updates. The U.S. Roads WikiProject has formed task forces for every state and territory lacking one, and consolidated all of the existing state-level subprojects into task forces of the parent project. The exception is that the New York State routes project remains as a subproject at this time. Imzadi 1979 → 12:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luce–Celler Act of 1946. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC) -- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
United States History Project‑class | ||||||||||||||
|
United States: History Project‑class | ||||||||||
|
{{ WikiProject United States History}} and {{ WikiProject United States|UShistory=yes}} exist, should the subproject banner be merged into the main USproj banner?
70.24.247.54 ( talk) 04:38, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
I am a little surprised that the categories Category:United States counties established in xxxx, with xxxx being the year of establishment, do not already exist. As per this discussion on my talk page, I am no longer adding U.S. counties to Category:States and territories established in xxxx ( example of one of those categories). What would the community think if I created the various Category:United States counties established in xxxx categories and categorized each U.S. county appropriately?
Please let me know if I need to clarify. Thanks! -- Andrew (User:90) (talk) 22:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Many articles in the xxxx in the United States series ( example) are all jumbled up at the bottom because someone has used the {{Div col}} template for the birth and death sections without closing it. Our two options for fixing this are (1) close each instance of {{Div col}} or (2) remove each instance of {{Div col}}. Since there are only a couple items in each list, I propose we remove {{Div col}} entirely from these sections. Would anyone object to that?
Note: {{Div col}} is a template used to make a list show up in multiple columns instead of just one. It generally is not used unless there are a lot of items in the list. -- Andrew (User:90) (talk) 22:39, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Do you Support or Oppose including this article and adding the WPUS banner? – Lionel ( talk) 02:06, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Do you Support or Oppose including this article and adding the WPUS banner?– Lionel ( talk) 02:13, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Do you Support or Oppose including this article and adding the WPUS banner?– Lionel ( talk) 02:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Are not good examples to dispute over. If you want to dispute over an example chose something solely CT related.
These four are all then suitable for other geographical based projects than CT.
Rich
Farmbrough, 21:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC).
This is a fascinating legal case, anyone want to collaborate on improving the page with me? Please leave a note on my user talk page, — Cirt ( talk) 18:22, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
It seems that as of late the prevailing argument is that this project has become too big and the community has stated and continues to state that themembers of the project cannot dictate their scope nor tag articles they feel are in it. My bots tasks has been revoked which also means that the collaboration and Newsletter will stop because I simply don't have time to maintain those and manually do all the things the project needs. Weve done a lot of great work and we have come along way but I wanted to leave this message for those that might be watching that its very likely that the community will force us very soon to break apart. This means that each individual project that is supported by WPUS and makes up the common community will revert back into individual projects and that if a lwer echelon tag (such as a state tag) exists we won't be able to tag that article. This also means that the states can't tag the city articles and so on. So this means that this project will not be allowed to tag very much because almost all articles fall into one or more of the 100+ US related projects. -- Kumioko ( talk) 16:27, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Relevant guideliens from Wikiproject guide and its subpage:
WikiProjects have sole and absolute authority to define their scopes
A group of editors cannot be forced to support any article that they do not wish to support, or prohibited from supporting any article that they wish to support
No project can control another project or other editor: No project can demand that another project support an article, change its scope, quit working on an article.
Only this group of editors decides on its scope, what articles are included, and what articles are excluded. If there is a consensus to add an article, removal of the banner is disruptive and a violation or WP:EW. Editors removing banners must be informed of the group consensus and warned to cease. Editors edit warring against project consensus should be reported for WP:ER or WP:ANI as appropriate. – Lionel ( talk) 02:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Regarding LOCALCONSENSUS, it appears to contradict the proj guide. Before any "wider community" attempts to change the scope of this wikiproject, the wikilawyers will have to hash it out. That said, "sole and absolute authority" is extremely strong phrasing, and disregarding this should not be done lightly. In addition, the concept behind wikiprojects is that they are a group of people, and the community in the past has allowed these groups to be self-directing and to the extent possible, autonomous. For "outsiders" to meddle in the minutiae of these groups would seriously undermine all wikiprojects. – Lionel ( talk) 23:17, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
For those who may be considering picking up the pieces I left scattered around and keep this project going the following might be helpful. In response to my misguided view that a WikiProject should be able to tag the articles in its scope without other editors and projects showing ownswership over them. Perhaps I was a bit overzealous in my tagging but but it was to ensure that content with no or sole project support would not be left abandoned or to rot. If content is not tagged with a project banner then you have only categories in which to do maintenance on the related articles or content. Since much of the content doesn't have categories, or because the category structure is prohibitively hard to work with and use with an almost endless supply of problems associated with them, using categorization to run a project isn't an efficient way to conduct WikiProject Business. Additionally, bot notifications such as Popular pages, featured content and article alerts doesn't work with categories alone. THEY MUST be tagged with a project banner in order to work. If you fix that problem then my overzealous tagging would not be as needed. Perhaps instead of using Category:WikiProject United States articles to display the 200+ thousand articles we could simply allow the input of hundreds or thousands of categories instead for these tools/bots to work. It seems like that might be more efficiant (sorry for the sarcastic comment here. Its intended to be somwhat humorous while pointing to a problem). The above comment, I think covers why I think they should be tagged but I will clarify, Its so that the article or other content is covered and counted by the project so that the project will be notified/counted if it is promoted, deleted, moved or submitted for something like reviews or discussions. In addition, here is a quick run down of why I was doing what I was doing:
As with many things these were all a work in progress and I was refining things as I went. Additionally there were overlaps between items. I hope this helps to explain what I was doing, and why and what I won't be doing in the future. Good Luck. -- Kumioko ( talk) 15:36, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Do you Support or Oppose including this article and adding the WPUS banner?– Lionel ( talk) 02:13, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
I just wanted to leave a quick note that there will be no more newsletter or updates to the monthly collaboration due to the prevailing community consensus to immediately stop support, maintenance and expansion of this project. -- Kumioko ( talk) 11:55, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
There is a HUGE number of articles in Category:Cycling in the United States but there is no Cycling in the United States article. -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 03:14, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Based on the comments from WikiProject Montana and WikiProject Florida, which they opposed it, I would suggest to split into few projects since it has a activity and some would remain to be part of WikiProject United States. JJ98 ( Talk / Contributions) 21:18, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Maile66 ( talk) 22:50, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, United States has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the good article reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Cambalachero ( talk) 18:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject Kentucky includes an Eastern Mountain Coal Fields task force that has tags on a number of articles related to that region of Kentucky. Now that the state Wikiproject has been subsumed into this one, the task force information no longer appears on talk pages for those articles. The information does appear in the template for the US Wikiproject, though. What would it take to restore it to the template display? -- Orlady ( talk) 18:45, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
|Coal-fields=
or the alternate seen in the documentation
here or add that parameter alias to the Template code and implement it. --
Kumioko (
talk) 18:55, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Well, I'm an administrator, and I'd be happy to edit that template, but I don't know how to fix the problems there. It's not exactly obvious how to fix issues in code as complex as what's in that template. -- Orlady ( talk) 00:45, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
|tf 3 = {{{Coal-fields|{{{KY-coal|}}}}}}
I've just scrubbed the member lists of all users who are subject to long term blocks. There are a few things that could make these lists easier to manage so that bots aren't sending newsletters to users who aren't reading them, leading to the odd situation where one bot is filling up talk pages and another is archiving them, month after month, for no good reason.
Just some thoughts aimed at helping make this easier to manage and avoid wasting resources. Beeblebrox ( talk) 02:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Or you could have people subscribe to the newsletter. That is how I have seen a number of projects do it. I know a lot of people don't like getting such things unless they specifically ask to get them. -
DJSasso (
talk) 13:54, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
I would suggest one more thing about member lists:
I have nominated Frederick_Russell_Burnham 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. Nikkimaria ( talk) 14:03, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
I have begun the procedure for beginning the project by making the proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals. To add your name to support the proposal go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Occupy movement.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 23:13, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello guys, there has been a discussion on the Geographical coordinates project which led to the development of a new scheme to add line and outline data to applicable Wikipedia articles. I've been working on a bot to add KML outline data to each US county. These outlines would show up as an area highlight (click the blue globe in the top right of Los Alamos County, New Mexico for an example) and links to Google Maps and Bing Maps can be displayed with the county outline as an overlay. I'm sure you can provide further insight and ideas on the GeoProject discussion page, and you might leave a comment or two at my bot request page for the county job at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/DschwenBot. Thanks! -- Dschwen 21:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Category:African-American people, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 13:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Haymarket affair, which is listed as part of this WikiProject, has been nominated for a community reassessment to determine if it meets the good article criteria and so can be listed as a good article. Please add comments to the article reassessment page. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 19:48, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Asian American#Infobox Image discussion 2012. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 18:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#Immigration status. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 17:41, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
These sentences don't make sense:
In 1764, Gilpin purchased 39 acres of land much of which is located in and around present day Millington, MD. Millington was then known as Head of Chester considering the As a member of the American Philosophical Society, Gilpin was involved with planning a possible waterway that would be a shortcut for shipping from the Chesapeake Bay to the City of Philadelphia.
I suspect that someone made an editing error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.242.86.145 ( talk) 12:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Philippines Campaign (1944–1945)#Emphasis on British. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 21:27, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Please comment on a merge at Talk:Radio y Televisión Martí. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 06:12, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
I recommend that you send out the March newsletter. A remembrance of your (I'm a non-member) former members contributions would be most fitting. Also a call for volunteers would be a good idea. If someone writes it here Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/Newsletter/March 2012 I can send it out with Edwardsbot. Let's not let him fade away into oblivion without thanks from the group he loved. – Lionel ( talk) 08:31, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I am creating a new Wikipedia article titled “Second Generation Immigrants in the United States.” On the project page it states that one of the project’s primary aims is to add knowledge to Wikipedia concerning subjects that are of national significance. In the U.S. Census Bureau press release of October 2010, it states that as of 2009 11% of the US population is a second generation immigrant. The population of second generation immigrants in this country is increasingly becoming a national concern in term of policies. As more and more US citizens are born with at least one foreign born parent, this percentage will surely increase. Thus, the voice of second generation immigrants will gain power through numbers. Also, since the majority of second generation immigrants are of minority status, their growing numbers can be used to advocate minority rights and demand governmental action. I plan on including various statistical data showing education and income levels obtained by second generation immigrants, along with information on theories of assimilation, as how these children are assimilated into society can have a huge impact on future economic successes and therefore on the overall developmental progression of the nation. Is there any other type of information that I should focus on in the creation of this article that would further promote the goals of this Wikiproject? I would greatly appreciate any suggestions you may have. Thank you. Marymorales291 ( talk) 04:03, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
I am creating an entry on "Human Trafficking in Houston, Texas" which will specifically explore the types of trafficking found in the city as well as the city's characteristics, legally and culturally, which make the city a popular hub for trafficking in the United States. There are pages created for Human Trafficking and Contemporary Slavery, but there are not sections designated specifically for Houston. Even on the page for Houston, Texas, where other crimes are listed, human trafficking is not. I plan to edit the page "Slavery in the United states" and add a section about the contemporary slavery issues in Houston today. Are there any objections to this? Right now the page is concerned with slavery in the colonial America up until the Civil War, my edits would add information of a very different time period and type of slavery. Amacune ( talk) 22:18, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
For discussion on whether to merge the History of the Hmong in Merced, California, please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Asian_Americans#History_of_the_Hmong_in_Merced.2C_California WhisperToMe ( talk) 18:05, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
For Women's History Month, I created List of First Ladies and Gentlemen of Texas and an accompanying Navbox. It's an area that has slipped through the cracks in Wikipedia. Photos are needed, as are individual pages. While all the presidents of the Republic, and the Governors of the state, have had individual articles created, most of the First Ladies of Texas have not, becoming neglected footnotes in history as names married to important persons. The state's only First Gentleman - James E. Ferguson - has his own page, but only because he was first a Governor. Any help anyone would care to give would be welcome. Maile66 ( talk) 20:15, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Under "Other" above, it cites "Spanish land grants" in California and historic Mexico. I didn't want to just arbitrarily delete that, but the subject matter seems to have been covered in Spanish land grants in California (redirect to Ranchos of California) and Spanish land grants in New Mexico. Maile66 ( talk) 22:06, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
The article needs some work. It presents a lot of claims by conspiracy proponents as is and gives them undue weight to a fringe position among historical academics. On the talk page we're also discussing what can count as a reliable source. At least I recommend adding the page to your watchlist. -- Harizotoh9 ( talk) 01:56, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I hope those with an interest in WW2 or military history consider looking at the Western Betrayal article which as it stands now is largely aimed at blaming America and Britain for everything that went wrong in Europe from 1939 on. Can anyone write an alternative POV or neutralize the whole article such that British and American perspectives are given some currency? Pultusk ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:32, 2 April 2012 (UTC).
Wikipedia:HighBeam details a limited opportunity for experienced Wikipedia editors to have free access to HighBeam Research, an invaluable resource for locating reliable sources for articles and content related to the United States as well as other subjects.-- JayJasper ( talk) 18:50, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
I realize that Kumioko is gone but don't let this project die because one user has left. 71.163.243.232 ( talk) 14:24, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Many articles on cities in the United States were originally created with a bot from U.S. census data, and then expanded by individual editors. I think it would be worthwhile to create articles on all populated places in the United States for which articles do not already exist using the data available from the Geographic Names Information System and perhaps from other reliable sources, such as post office records and state geographical names agencies, so that editors wanting to add information about a particular unincorporated community could have a stub to start from. The information from GNIS is enough to create a respectable stub article on each place. See West Virginia Central Junction, West Virginia for an article that I created only from GNIS data, and Mooselookmeguntic, Maine and Olema, Washington for articles that I created with GNIS data and other references.
I don't have the programming skills to create a bot to do this, but I'm hoping someone else will. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 01:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
There are more than 80K unassessed articles about US. I had a idea to start a contest regarding Assessment.
I thought that United States has a good number of articles now and needs clean up.
This will be beneficial for articles as well as editors as they will be able to interact with editors in their country and will learn new things and can obtain a lot of knowledge about their country.
Please add your name here if you want to take part in this contest: [1] and [2]
Details: [3]
Instructions: [4]
Awards to be given: [5]
Work that is to be done can be viewed here: [6]
Regards! Yash t 101 08:06, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Thor Hesla might be borderline notable, even though the article has been nominated for deletion.
Is he notable for anything that has not been mentioned in the article?
(He is probably not notable only for being a victim of a terrorist attack.) -- Sywoofer ( talk) 08:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
I have proposed a split for "History" section because some are concerned about length of the section. I have posted this message for hopes of coming into Talk:Social Security (United States). -- George Ho ( talk) 03:29, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
I have created a task force proposal for television show Cheers at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Cheers. Come there for discussion. -- George Ho ( talk) 04:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Jim Yong Kim is currently rated as high importance, is that right? Seems like a president of the World Bank isn't all that important to the US. 70.49.124.225 ( talk) 05:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
In addition to the tag and assess drive suggested last week WikiProject Military history is looking for editors to help them do B-Class assessments to the 24,000+ articles that need it for their project. I'll try to knock out some while I have the time, but clearing out this category might go faster with some help. I noticed that a huge number of these articles also related to WPUS or one of the supported projects so I thought some members of this project might be interested. 138.162.8.57 ( talk) 18:54, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Some articles have fallen back into the unassessed categories when a second state template was converted to the US template instead of merging. I found those when checking the assessment log for articles going eg from stub to unknown. It is worth keeping an eye on the log, but I am sure there are a number of older cases like this and it be more worthwhile to set a bot at this to untangle to straitforward cases. Agathoclea ( talk) 05:37, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
This proposal relates to copyrights. Feel free to discuss. -- George Ho ( talk) 17:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
The project banner for United States Senate election in Connecticut, 2012 was reverted as not in scope for our project. See also the reverters reasoning at User talk:Agathoclea#United States Senate election in Connecticut, 2012. I said I will refer it to the project page to decide if the article is in scope or not. Agathoclea ( talk) 13:54, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
(editconflict) We are actually digressing and arguing with an outsider - the real issue why I brought this here is do the members of the project feel the article is in scope or not. Anybody else cares to comment? c ( talk) 15:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately the truth of the matter is that until about a year and a half ago this project was defunct and a good number of the 100+ US related projects (you can see them in the Embassy tab) were defunct or inactive as well. When I started to rebuild and revive this project in the hopes of also reviving some of the others and providing a core project from which to help support these projects and the articles in them several projects and editors felt that it was a hostile takeover. Its been a back and forth since then, with Mark currently taking the lead in defending his little corner of the Wiki from the Evils of Kumioko and WPUS. Contrary to what some may try and get others to believe I have never, and never had the intention too, take over any project. Particularly not those that didn't want any. I do however think that any project has the right to add their tag to any article they feel is in their scope. In the past, with only a couple exceptions, if even one editor in a project opposed being supported by WPUS I didn't add them or added them to the joint projects list. There have even been a few cases where they said yes (or didn't reply at all) and then later changed their mind and were removed. Kumioko ( talk) 15:15, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
I just know I'm going to regret weighing in on this, having observed a tiny portion of the previous drama at a distance, but as to the instant case, I absolutely think any federal election falls within the intended scope of this project. Yes, it is a state election, but it is for a federal office, and any single state election can potentially have a dramatic effect on the balance of power in the entire chamber and Congress. (See Scott Brown's election to the Senate from Massachusetts.)
As to the larger point about what projects tag what articles, I'm bumfuzzled as to why so much energy has been devoted to it. The banners take up so little screen real estate, especially with the advent of the banner shell, that I can't imagine why it is worth all this to keep another banner off. To use the hyperbolic analogy I'm seeing thrown around, if someone created a WikiProject Milky Way and tagged every article in my Governors of Kentucky pet project, my level of concern would be somewhere between infintesimally small and non-existent. How is it that big a deal? It might be one extra turn on a scroll wheel. I don't get it. Acdixon ( talk · contribs) 15:54, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
I have created the Family planning in the United States and Birth control in the United States article to fill gaps and as a tidy up of Family planning. The articles need work. I am no expert on these topics. -- Alan Liefting ( talk - contribs) 10:29, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
We have the page meta:Consejo de las secciones estadounidenses de Wikimedia on Meta for speakers of Spanish. It is a Spanish-language version of the page meta:Wikimedia United States Chapters Council WhisperToMe ( talk) 04:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
I had an idea that I think will benefit not only WikiProject United States but the supported projects as well. I am working on refining the logic in Template:WikiProject United States to favor at least some of the individual projects over the umbrella United States project. What this would do, if I can get it to work at all, is to display the individual project (Arizona for example) as the primary project with United States in the lower supported project role when applicable. This would give the individual project more influence and prominence on the article while still allowing the use of one template, still alowing the articles and other content to be tracked across multiple project categories (United States and Arizona for example) and I think give more emphasis where its due. I'm not even sure if I can get this to work but my preliminary attempts at Template:WikiProject United States/Arizona indicate that its possible. Does anyone have any thoughts, ideas or suggestins on this idea? Kumioko ( talk) 19:36, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
There is a discussion over here on what food might best represent American cuisine. Please come offer your opinions. Thanks! ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Quick question: are the individual state WP templates supposed to be replaced by the standard WP US template, with links to the individual state projects? 76.7.224.171 ( talk) 03:29, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
I know this was recently suggested as a drive but I am going to throw it out here again for anyone interested. We seem to have built up a substantial backlog in articles that need to be assessed or given an importance to the project(s). I have been and will continue to chip away at this over the next couple of weeks as I find the time. It appears others are working this as well and that is appreciated. If anyone else wants to pitch in and do a few assessments for the US related project thats nearest to your heart your assistance would be greatly appreciated. I have added these below the assessment table on the main project page but below are a couple of progress bars just to help give a face to the problem and the progress.
Click on [show] for progress bar for Unassessed United States articles
| |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Click on [show] for progress bar for Unknown-importance United States articles
| |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Kumioko ( talk) 19:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
I have recently made major revisions to the Sawtooth National Forest page. I think that with some review and revision this article will qualify for FA status. I also think that this forest may have the most comprehensive coverage (including all linked pages about forest features) of any U.S. National Forest, and perhaps any protected area. Feel free to make grammatical and formatting changes, but before adding, removing, and changing content I would like to hear about the changes. Fredlyfish4 ( talk) 21:28, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Other than whats listed above here are a couple of things I recommend:
Aside from these mostly stylistic and nitpicky things great job it looks like a really well written article. Kumioko ( talk) 01:57, 12 May 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the help folks. I've been working on making changes per your suggestions. Fredlyfish4 ( talk) 01:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
A discussion has been opened on the talk page of the battleship USS Missouri (BB-63) centered on the issue of whether or not to include a mention of battleship's appearance in the music video If I Could Turn Back Time, all interested editors are welcome to participate.
70.24.251.208 ( talk) 05:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
FYI Citigroup Center has been requested to be renamed. See talk:Citigroup Center; as one of the iconic buildings of an American skyline, you might want to know. 70.24.251.208 ( talk) 03:42, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated List of signers of the United States Constitution for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harrias ( talk • contribs) 14:04, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Specifically, Talk:List of Tea Party politicians#Post-AfD clarification and possible slimming down. Input would be much appreciated. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 14:50, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
In Talk:United_States_Senate_election_in_Massachusetts,_2012#Polling_order, we are having a dispute concerning whether polls should be listed in chronological or reverse-chronological order. I would appreciate any outside input from the broader group of editors who contribute to these articles. Thanks! johnpseudo 16:16, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
I had a question about the WikiProjects supported by the WPUS banner. I see that certain states are supported by the banner but not all. Why are all 50 states not covered? 64.6.124.31 ( talk) 19:11, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Here is some grist featuring depth of project scope rather than allocation to supported state and city projects.
Each row concerns one article, listed first, that I used last hour for exhibit in "Five cents on list chronological order" (re #Polling order on another talk page [7]). None of the three is now in WikiProject US. The second and third listings are less general and more general parents of the exhibit article. Bold marks those now in WikiProject US. Major League Baseball is based in the U.S. but operates regularly in North American and the Caribbean with one member ballclub in Toronto. ALSC is one division of the American Library Association. BRS, ALA, and NBF are private organizations, not government. There seems to be principle or two in operation here. -- P64 ( talk) 16:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated American Civil War for a reassessment of its Good Article status due to its extreme length. (see Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/American_Civil_War/2) Please comment as this is a community reassessment. Quarkgluonsoup ( talk) 21:40, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Kumioko,
I just ran across this: Talk:Jim Garrison, and think you might want to look at the page. Something seems to be off, and it looks like you were the last one to edit the banner. Maile66 ( talk) 22:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
The first version of a report on the use of self-published sources is now available, in Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia reliability. Some of the self-published sources listed in the report pertain to this project.
Suggestions on the report itself (a discussion has started here), and help in remedying the use of the self-published items that relate to this project will be appreciated. History2007 ( talk) 06:16, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
An article from this project is nominated for Featured Article status: Smith Act trials of Communist Party leaders. To assist the process, visit its FA review page to add comments, or register support/oppose sentiments. Cheers. -- Noleander ( talk) 00:05, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
WP:KY has this page, updated by AAlertBot, that tells when any of the project's articles enter a review workflow (GA, FA, PR, ACR, etc.) Do we have this for WP:US? Should we? Could give folks looking for something to review a place to start. Acdixon ( talk · contribs) 14:02, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
There is a discussion ongoing at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Barack Obama/archive9 Lihaas ( talk) 16:30, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia article = Pleasant Valley War.
A good source of information on the Pleasant Valley Cattle War is the book, "Oxen to Oxides," by John Fletcher "Fletch" Fairchild, who was born in 1897. This book exists only as a typed manuscript (as of June 2012). Fletch Fairchild recounts the stories told to him about this Graham-Tewksbury feud. His book greatly elaborates as to how the feud began, particularly the role played by the Daggs Brothers. He recounts the story of the first white man killed in the feud, as well as two prior incidents where men were killed PRIOR to the shooting of John Tewksbury and William Jacobs.
A copy of this book is in the Sedona Heritage Museum, Sedona, Arizona.
The article's title should be changed from Pleasant Valley War to Pleasant Valley Cattle War, which is what he called it and he knows how the locals referred to it, because he was there. My two cents.
Forrest747 ( talk) 03:57, 15 June 2012 (UTC) submitted by forrest747
Is the WikiProject US logo even eligible for copyright protection? It's just simple geometry. (You could have an unregistered trademark on it and license the trademark under CC-BY-SA.) 68.173.113.106 ( talk) 23:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
The US National Archives WikiProject seeks a coordinator to help reboot the project and work on new initiatives! The role is modeled after other Wikiproject coordinators, like the WikiProject Military History coordinators. The coordinator will work with the Wikipedian in Residence to organize and increase participation in the WikiProject, with the goal that the WikiProject is an active space for collaboration maintained by and for the Wikipedia editors, rather than the National Archives.
Please see the full information at Wikipedia:GLAM/NARA/Coordinator. Feel free to pass this note along to any interested parties. Thanks! Dominic· t 16:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
The Future section at
Politics of Texas has been blanked 4 times since 2 June 2012. Interested editors are invited to comment on this issue at
Future section discussion.
In response to a posting at
WikiProject_Texas,
User:Maile66 suggested posting a notice here for increased visibility and
said that he had requested temporary page protection.
SBaker43 (
talk) 17:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
An earlier requested-move survey generated lots of controversy and an arbitration case. Therefore, this one is being posted here and in many other places, to gather a very wide range of opinions outside of the Scotland and Australia WikiProjects. |
A requested move survey was started at Talk:Perth_(disambiguation)#Requested_move, which proposes to move:
Background: There was a previous requested-move survey which ran from late May to mid June. There was a great deal of controversy surrounding the closure and subsequent events, which involved a number of reverts and re-reverts which are the subject of an ongoing arbitration case; there was also a move review process. — P.T. Aufrette ( talk) 04:09, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Michelle Rhee#Relation of subject to Paul Scott. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 10:12, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Template:United States, a redirect to Template:United States political divisions, is being discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion#Template:United States. Your views would be most welcome in that discussion. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
We are doing great so far on the assessments for the project. Not only have we dropped from 28, 647 articles needing assessment to below 16, 700 (representing about 42% complete, we also dropped from 73, 309 articles lacking importance to below 36, 000 (representing 50.9% complete). At the same time we added about 27, 000 pieces of content and several projects so great job for those that are working on this.
Many of you are focusing on specific projects so this progress bar chart will not truly reflect your efforts but the chart below does give an idea where the project as a whole stands.
Click on [show] for progress bar for the Unassessed United States articles
| |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Click on [show] for progress bar for the Unknown-importance United States articles
| |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Again great job. Kumioko ( talk) 18:24, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure where to ask this, so I'll float it here and we'll see how it goes. On what seems like hundreds of thousands of articles on Wikipedia about United States local municipalities (cities, townships, counties), there are demographic blurbs. They were predominantly taken from the 2000 Census, and there is an incomplete effort to transition this to 2010 Census information. I am particularly interested in the median household/family income data. Where was this drawn from, and what's being done to update it for 2010? Is income even something that the Census measures, or is that handled separately by the American Community Survey? I think some effort at consistency here is worth thinking through. What source was used for the 2000 median income information? MrArticleOne ( talk) 14:36, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
The historic Daisy ad helped Lyndon Johnson win a landslide over Barry Goldwater in 1964 and is an important turning point in political and advertising history. The entire full length video is up for Featured Picture! Click here to check it out. – Lionel ( talk) 09:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
See discussion on whether to include the alternate colloquial name of "nigger goose", currently disputed. go to Talk:Double-crested_Cormorant#Inclusion_of_colloquial_name_.22nigger_goose.22 Casliber ( talk · contribs) 00:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Filipino American#Lack of images. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 23:52, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Americans#NON WHITE HISPANICS(SOME OTHER RACE) or HISPANICS SECTION. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:00, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Venus Williams won gold in tennis singles, not Serena — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.64.145.190 ( talk) 02:18, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
This is an invitation to "United States" members to comment on my proposal for a "Westerns" WikiProject to deal specifically with articles regarding Western movies and Western TV series', major Western actors, directors and people involved in this vast genre over the past century. This is for the fictional Wild West – such as Hollywood's re-imagining of the Old West – so not a historical project. Comments, ideas and further support appreciated. Thanks. — Ma®©usBritish[ chat 12:24, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Westerns
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Barack Obama#Article idea. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
FYI Talk:Missy Franklin is currently discussing issues concerning people with dual citizenships, in this case, Canada and USA -- 70.50.151.36 ( talk) 08:04, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Military history of the United States. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 16:35, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
I want to know more about the documentary I saw on Animal Planet. It was extremely moving, but not quite convincing to me,although,I believe anything is possible. I would like to know if the scientists from NOAA are legit, or is this just another way to invite fallacies into everyone's heads? I firmly believe the government will go towards any lengths to dispell this is true. I also believe that it may "tie into" alien intiatives within the ocean environment. Is there a connection,or is it a separate issue altogether? SOS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lori anthos ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
What's this business of WikiProject United States taking over all the state wikiprojects? This is inane. I've been actively working under the auspices of the WikiProject Rhode Island, and then it gets sucked up into some big meaningless conglomerate. This is a corporate takeover. Come on folks, what's next? WikiPrjoect Wikipedia? Wikiproject World? I would like to be working within a wikiproject that is limited in scope and meaningful. Please return Rhode Island to its own wikiproject! Sarnold17 ( talk) 09:26, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Since you raised several points I am going to respond to each separately as bulleted below. Please let me know if I missed any:
As with Ed I think that the Rhode Island project and its articles gains more from the WPUS support than it lost in its banner but I hope this helps to explain things a little. Kumioko ( talk) 14:37, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
I had to ask for help on this one but take a look at this.
I think adding the extra block of color is a little much but this will allow the supported projects importance to be much more prominant and visible compared to WikiProject United States. Let me know what you think. Kumioko ( talk) 23:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm coming to this really late, but are the importance ratings really needed? They're extremely subjective, and Milhist gets along just fine without them (possibly even better, with no importance-related disputes!). Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Is there any particular reason why this project doesn't have a collaboration with WikiProject Florida? I mean, it would make sense if two project collaborated. Steel1943 ( talk) 02:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
The quest for getting Wikipedia editors the sources they need for articles related to the United States and other subjects is gaining momentum. Here's what's happening and what you can sign up for right now:
In addition to these great partnerships, you might be interested in the next-generation idea to create a central Wikipedia Library where approved editors would have access to all participating resource donors. It's still in the preliminary stages, but if you like the idea, add your feedback to the Community Fellowship proposal to start developing the project. Drop by the talk page of User:Ocaasi, who is overseeing these projects, if you have any questions.-- JayJasper ( talk) 17:46, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
List of United States Presidential autobiographies. I created this article, but no one seems to be editing or improving it, which is disappointing considering that this article has a great purpose. Thank you. Futurist110 ( talk) 01:05, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't know if this has been discussed before, but this has been bugging me for quite some time. The colors on the svg file of the US Flag look faded like they were left in the sun for too long rather than the colors that are found on a flag in good shape. Are we 100% sure the source used gave us the right colors? (I do take notice it could just be my monitor, however after calibrating it several times, I don't think it is.) CRRays Head90 | Get Some! 14:07, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Kumioko, I think you might have some ideas about this. It involves all the references for articles for Louisiana made by (blocked) editor Billy Hathorn. Big problem with this. His method of referencing was to slap bare urls all - now mostly dead links - over everything. He did over 100,000 edits in Texas and Louisiana, and who knows where else. But this post is strictly about his Louisiana dead link bare urls. I created Louisiana Center for Women and Government Hall of Fame and, naturally, looked for any pre-created matching articles for the individual entries in the table. And I was wondering why everything in Louisiana was in such poor shape, dead bare urls all over the place. Louisiana politics was Billy's bailiwick. Because the pre-existing article Louisiana Political Museum and Hall of Fame, was not in a sortable I could use, I reworked it inserting 100 references of my own. Again, that article and related articles were Billy's work, in whole or in part. Dead bare urls all over Wikipedia. I've been looking over at the WikiProject Louisiana, and I think it might not be active. My question: is it feasible that a bot could be created to zap through the Billy Hathorne related articles in Louisiana and catch those bare urls? I suspect it would involve many, many articles. But those articles look like trash the way they are now. Also, one of the reasons Billy got banned was apparently copyvio, complete copy and paste. Big problem. Got any ideas how to clean up Louisiana? Maile66 ( talk) 00:29, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, it's not particularly well worded for non-userpages, but yeah, this WikiProject is now setup and still in the early stages of building its project area before user-participation can really begin to function. Anyone interested, please feel free to join. Note, this project not only covers film and TV, but Western novels, comics, actors, directors and authors, etc who make the fictional-Wild West possible. Thanks, Ma®©usBritish{ chat} 01:32, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Jorge Otero Barreto#Most decorated. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 05:21, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
There has been some discussion on my talk page in the last few days about getting an A-Class review process going for WikiProject United States. There are a few of us already interested but I wanted to start a discussion here to give the rest of the project a chance to comment before building the infrastructure. Does anyone have any opinion about this project developing an A-Class review process? Here are a few thoughts I have about it:
Please let us know if you have any questions or comments about this proposal. Kumioko ( talk) 23:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
The banner already includes (or should do so) the flag for A-class, so stay withing the banner I say. But like with GA and FA it should also be in the article milestones template. A-Class is usually considered better than GA AFAIR. Agathoclea ( talk) 12:11, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Unfortunately after 10 days we have only had a couple folks comment. For something like this to work I think it would need more than a couple editors and it just doesn't seem like we have enough support for something like this at this time. Kumioko ( talk) 02:05, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated Apollo program for a GA review. JustinTime55 ( talk) 18:13, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Given the amount of material involved with this project, I think maybe having some sort of newsletter, maybe like the MILHIST Bugle, might be useful. I kinda keep the current Christianity newsletter going, so I know a little about getting one together theoretically if not necessarily artistically. But something of the type might be useful in maybe getting some more people more actively involved. Any opinions, and, if yes, any specific ideas as to how it should look, what it should include, that sort of thing? John Carter ( talk) 18:33, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Input is needed at an RfC regarding tea party: Talk:List_of_Tea_Party_politicians#RfC:_What_is_criterion_for_inclusion_in_this_list.3F. -- Noleander ( talk) 18:49, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
A discussion on the encyclopedic need for the use of military dates on United States military related articles is taking place at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Proposal to strike out the requirement that American military articles use military dates. Please join in.-- JOJ Hutton 23:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello. I've been creating American diplomat articles for a while now, and I hope this is the appropriate place to request a peer-review of some of my articles. I really can't discern between start-class and stub-class, B-class and C-class, etc., and I hope that some more experienced editors can accurately grade these articles. When I made most of them, I mass-included the {{us-diplomat-stub}} template, and many now seem to be of start or C class or better (like Chad and Marshall Islands, contrast Togo/others). Thanks in advance. (Note: Many also may require certain tags and refs filled in, etc.) All of these except for William Bodde, Jr. and Edward W. Mulcahy (start-class) are currently listed as stubs.
I originally intended to go to WP:Biography, but I figured this is more relevant to the United States (diplomacy). Again, I would greatly appreciate any peer-review classing/article improvements.
Royal
Mate1 22:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Деми Ловато, ديمي لوفاتو, دمی لواتو, Деметриа Девонн Ловато, Деметрия Девонн Ловато. Since you had some involvement with the Demi Lovato redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). -- 76.65.128.252 ( talk) 10:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:RightCowLeftCoast reported by User:MastCell (Result: ). RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 19:59, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
While making this template, I was surprised by how many of these articles do not exist. Savidan 20:21, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Barack Obama#Films. RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 20:30, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Voorhees College, founded in 1897, is a historically black college. It is omitted in the city of Denmark, SC listing.
Additionally, Denmark Technical College was also omitted under Denmark, SC. Charles3rd ( talk) 21:16, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
File:Samuel Phillips Lee.jpg has been nominated for immediate deletion as being unsourced -- 14:20, 2 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.128.252 ( talk)
file:Usgreatseal.png has been nominated for deletion as being unsourced -- 76.65.128.252 ( talk) 14:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
file:Henry-E-Erwin.png has been nominated for deletion as being unsourced -- 76.65.128.252 ( talk) 14:50, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
Currently
Template:WikiProject United States has logic to create a category for articles that have or do not have |listas=
. This parameter is used to help sort the article into the correct order in categories but in many cases its not needed because other projects, like WikiProject Biography already have it and that sort applies to any of the other projects listed. So, what I have suggested is to eliminate the category for United States articles without the listas parameter and just have it for those with the parameter.
On the request, the admin folks said I needed to leave a note on the project discussing the change. So here are a couple questions relating to the task:
Please let me know if you have any other suggestions. Kumioko ( talk) 12:53, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Someone has suggested using Future-Class for the project to identify the articles that are of a future tense such as the upcoming elections. Does anyone have any comments about doing this? Kumioko ( talk) 23:58, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
I just looked and there are only a handfull that I can find directly that would apply. Here are a couple:
I just wanted to get an idea. I tend to agree with Imzadi actually that it really wouldn't be that much effort but its fine with me either way. Kumioko ( talk) 03:33, 4 September 2012 (UTC)