Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council

Category question

Is there an active category here with editors that specialize in a topic that would include COVID-19 lab leak theory? I guess this is in medicine and epidemiology and virology but I did not see those categories. Are there projects related to media and politics whose scope would touch on that topic? Lardlegwarmers (talk) 03:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

We don't really have categories of editors, but we do have Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. That said, you have already initiated discussion on that article talkpage, and it is likely watched by most of those who are already interested in the topic. CMD (talk) 03:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, and it's previously been (much) discussed at WP:FTN. Bon courage (talk) 02:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Creating a WikiProject

Hello people! I just wanna ask if I can create a WikiProject without going to a official process? I'm planning to create a WikiProject for a girl group. Royiswariii Talk! 08:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide is worth a read. In summary creating a Wikiproject won't do much without having other editors on board. CMD (talk) 12:24, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

@Royiswariii, you should join Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Music and Wikipedia:WikiProject Pop music instead, and you should not attempt to start any separate WikiProjects until you have half a dozen other experienced editors who will publicly state that they will participate.

Years ago, I pulled some stats on WikiProjects that were successful (more specifically, that didn't completely fail within a few months). The two key indicators were: the person starting them had been editing for years (I notice you've been editing for only four months), and there were lots of people interested in working with that person (the more, the merrier, but 6 to 10 was usually enough). Most WikiProjects that didn't meet both of these criteria failed. In many cases, a couple of months later, nobody was posting and the original founder had stopped editing. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:31, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject approval process

Months ago, we said we'd update the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals process. I think we need to make a fundamental decision: Do we actually want any more WikiProjects?

Leaving aside the chance of a once-a-decade group like Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19, I'm currently wondering whether the answer is that we actually don't want to encourage WikiProjects. One possibility is to just say "No", or at least "No, unless you can produce a petition that will be listed on Wikipedia:Times that 100 Wikipedians supported something".

Another is to suggest a lightweight alternative, such as this:

• Create a central page at User:Founder/Favorite_thing.
• Create a shared watchlist by making a list of all articles you're interested in at User:Founder/Favorite_thing/Articles we support and then using Special:RecentChangesLinked on that page.
• Do not create banners. Do not tag articles. Do not create categories. Do not spam links to your page. Do not do or say anything that suggests this is an official or permanent group of any sort.
• Do invite your friends to work with you and to post on that page. Do invite individual editors who contribute to these articles to join you. Do post (once or twice) a link with an invitation at the most relevant WikiProject(s).
• If your group maintains at least five active participants for a year, then those pages can be moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Favorite thing. Participation will be measured by them posting to User talk:Founder/Favorite_thing, not by quietly editing the articles. (If they're not posting on that page, then you don't need a WikiProject page. The point of the WikiProject page is for participants to coordinate the group's activities.) If you don't meet that standard but you want it out of your userspace, then ask the most closely related active WikiProject to adopt your group, whether by completely merging it away or as a WP:TASKFORCE.

If we'd done this from the start, we'd have far fewer defunct WikiProjects now. What do you think?

WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• I generally support the premise that there are enough WikiProjects for any would-be WikiProject founder(s) to find an appropriate venue for collaboration. But, since many/most WPs are talk-inactive, I think that, rather than dilute the talk-pool further via User talk:Founder/Favorite_thing, just start using the most relevant WP from the start. If the traffic is enough to overwhelm the parent WP, then, based on the activity level & its duration leading up to that point, an informed decision can be made by the council & participants as to whether a TF or new WP is more appropriate.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  21:46, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

  That's basically what I said in the earlier discussion: use an appropriate existing WikiProject to host discussion, and then after some time the involved participants can decide on the best ways of working. If no one's work is being impeded, then no change is needed. If there is some clash in operations, they can consider changes, such as splitting off discussion to a subpage, creating a task force to separate out article alerts, or (perhaps in some cases) creating a new WikiProject. isaacl (talk) 22:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject category RecentChanges

cross-posted from Help Desk, no replies there

I can apply Special:RecentChangesLinked to various WikiProject categories, but it only tracks recent changes to the talk pages (since those are the pages tagged by the project banners).

Is there any way to get RecentChanges to display for the main pages corresponding to the talk pages in the category? Or a tool?

There used to be WP:XWT, which is now deprecated. Also a number of prominent topics (e.g., physics & math) for WP:1 'articles by quality' lists are deprecated (although a few are still working), as well as the replacement web tool. Tule-hog (talk) 18:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

@Tule-hog, you need to make a list of the WikiProject's pages. For example, make a list of everything in Category:All WikiProject Medicine pages (or any similar category), use search-and-replace to remove the Talk: part of the file name, and then use Special:RecentChangesLinked on the page. This won't auto-update, so you'll need to update the list manually every now and again. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer. Looks like its finally time to take a crack at Pywikibot. Tule-hog (talk) 21:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject Reviving and Changing the name

Hi! I'm just asking if a WikiProject defunct can be revive and change the name? Royiswariii Talk! 16:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Please consider the advice you were given at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council § Creating a WikiProject, and what I've previously suggested about using the most relevant active WikiProject to host discussion. isaacl (talk) 17:06, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Isaacl Actually, we found a defunct WikiProject here and the founder agreed to give it to me and start with my few fellows editors to start WikiProject. But, we will build and add a collaboration (or supported) to some existing WikiProjects like Wikipedia:WikiProject Pop Music to maintain the activeness of the parent WikiProject. It is possible? (And we're working now on the design of our future WikiProject, but it will take long). Royiswariii Talk! 12:48, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Other than WP:The Beatles and a handful of others, a new WikiProject should not be created for a particular band unless extremely popular both outside Wikipedia & within. Using WP:Pop music directly or creating a taskforce within it is fine.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  14:42, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't feel like you've taken the previously offered guidance into consideration. No one owns a WikiProject so no one can give one to you. I continue to advise starting with having discussions on the talk page of an existing active WikiProject. isaacl (talk) 23:49, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Isaacl But it says If your group can't wait for the new process, please only create group pages in the userspace of one of your members. It means we can create on my user or one of my members a WikiProject. Royiswariii Talk! 05:12, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

So, all the templates will be on my userpage? Royiswariii Talk! 05:13, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

No: User groups do not get any templates. They do not get to tag any pages. I should update the documentation to be very clear about that.

@Royiswariii, who else is in your group? A WikiProject is a group of editors who want to work together. If nobody's working with you, you do not have a WikiProject, full stop. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:20, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

WhatamIdoing, we're 7 or 8 (Final it's 8) active editors we're working and we're planning to create a WikiProject. since we're always active, I will be the founder of our WikiProject if they want to let me to create a WikiProject. Royiswariii Talk! 02:08, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Can you name these editors Royiswariii? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:22, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

AirshipJungleman29

Here:

AstrooKai

Borgenland

Acrom12

Royiswariii (me)

Bloomagiliw

Indo360 (semi-active, fully active will back on january)

Orojackson56 (per above)

Freedom Wall (counted in since they are actively on 2 articles) Royiswariii Talk! 02:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Where have you been talking to them about your plan? WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:55, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

on AstrooKai's talk page. Royiswariii Talk! 03:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Actually, i was planning to create a WikiProject too on October but it was scrapped due to a guidlines here on WikiProject and then they back to planning on creating a WikiProject. Royiswariii Talk! 03:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

What are you trying to get out of a Wikiproject? Are there particular tools you are looking for, or a particular thing you wish to see? CMD (talk) 04:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I was planning to create a WikiProject focused on Bini, a Filipino girl group, to organize and improved related article. Their popularity was like a rocketship, but of course I can maintain of activeness of the WikiProject through inviting on other editors. Royiswariii Talk! 06:49, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

That's the scope of the proposed group.

The question is about tools. For example, do you need a statistics table like the one at https://wp1.openzim.org/#/project/Philippine%20music%20task%20force ? Do you need a bot to deliver a newsletter? WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:00, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Oh sorry. Yes we need that too, and the banner of course. Royiswariii Talk! 07:07, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

What tools, and why? How exactly will you use them?

Do any of the other supposed members have any idea that you're trying to create this? WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

We need a project statistics bot and new article bots that can configure into a specific articles. I don't know the other bots that we need, do you know the other bots here and other basic needs of bots on WikiProject?

The other members are they know this, they leave me to create this and waiting to establish the WikiProject. Royiswariii Talk! 07:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

How about you collaborate together on Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians for a month, and if activity is high enough to require a separate project, you can split? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

AirshipJungleman29, Can you give me a tutorial how I do it? and if we maintain the high activeness, how can I split it? Royiswariii Talk! 11:56, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

You can have discussions on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians just as you would for an independent WikiProject. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thanks! Royiswariii Talk! 11:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Many CfD discussions on assessment categories

I thought it might be helpful to highlight the many different discussions which have recently closed or still happening at CfD regarding assessment categories. These are the ones that I am aware of, please add any others.

• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Category:FM-Class articles - initial nomination by myself to test the water. Closed as move.
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Category:Category-Class Comics articles of NA-importance - closed as delete.
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 7#Category:Category-Class articles - monster nomination of all other non-article categories. Closed as move. The batch is so large it seems to have broken the bot and these are still waiting to be moved.
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Category:Portal-Class Comics articles of NA-importance - although just one category is nominated, I suspect this relates to all non-article/NA-importance intersection categories. Discussion still open as I write.
• Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Cleaning up NA-class categories - ongoing discussion at village pump.
• Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 December 18#Category:NA-Class articles - partially confused because the previous consensus close has not yet been carried out.

— Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:33, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

@MSGJ: Since you say I suspect this relates to all non-article/NA-importance intersection categories. on Portal-Class xyz articles of NA-importance, I'd like to note that I'm fine with it in most cases. However, I oppose it on draft pages, and userspace pages with draft tags, because someone may want to provisionally rate the importance. For example, let's say there does not exist an article on Mars, so someone might create Draft:Mars and rate it's importance provisionally. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 03:46, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

That's pretty much what I wrote at the CfD discussion — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Assessment date in WPBS

Articles keep changing over time and may not reflect the quality at the time of last assessment. There is no way to know when an article was last assessed (except checking the page history). I think that WPBS should include an assessment date parameter. Thoughts? —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 18:29, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

I've no problem with scripts adding dates, but, in practice, I don't think we should expect editors to hand-edit the date when they manually update it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

I know you haven't suggested this, but I would strongly oppose anyone sending a bot around to add a starting date. This should be optional and, if it exists, more or less accurate, not "well, we started in on 27 December 2024, so everything is that date until changed later, including things that were last assessed in 2007". WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:05, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, sure. But most assessors use WP:RATER, which can include the assessment date without assessors having to hand-edit it, and without needing to send a bot for it. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 07:46, 25 December 2024 (UTC)