This page can be used to gauge support for potential WikiProjects before putting a lot of effort into creating a detailed project page.

Proposing a project: To propose a project, write a brief description (including links to the related Wikipedia articles), and add it along with your name to the list below (in alphabetical order by topic). Some boilerplate you can use:

== Name of project ==
; Description : [description here]


; Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
# [your name here]

; Comments

Expressing interest: If you're interested in any of the projects listed here, simply add your name to the appropriate list and start contributing to the relevant articles.

Creating a project: If your project gains support from 5-10 active Wikipedians, it could probably benefit from the organisation boost of having a proper page. Remove it from this list and follow the instructions for creating new projects.

Requesting a project: There may be cases where you believe that there is a pronounced need for the creation of a project which does not yet exist which you may not personally feel qualified to join. Some examples might be certain countries, disciplines, etc. In the event you are aware of such a situation, please add the relevant name to the list of projects below and see if there are any individuals interested in creating such a project.

Projects

Abolitionism

Description: This Wikiproject would focus on anything having to do with abolitionism, the history of abolitionism, instances of abolionism, the biographies of notable abolitionists in United States, South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and around the world. Psdubow 21:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

Psdubow 21:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Acoustic Music

Description: This WikiProject will help to create, expand, and complete articles about acoustic music. It will work on articles about artists, bands, songs, albums, EP's, singles, compilations, and tours.

Temporary project page: User:Hmwith/Wikiproject Acoustic Music

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

hmwith talk
Swannie 01:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)-good idea for a wikiproject![reply]

Comments:

I think this is both too broad and too vague to take action. -- Mikeblas 12:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree: it seems to cover almost all the music you can think of except for the music of the spheres. Nevertheless, if interested people can be found to give it focus and (perhaps) a different name it could be useful. —Ian Spackman 14:09, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be useful to include this as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Roots music (which covers Folk and Traditional as well)? All the styles listed at Acoustic music fall within the scope of the Roots music WikiProject (although that WikiProject covers Electric Folk too). If you're basing the project around the stuff listed on the Acoustic Music page, you might even want to form an American roots music task force as a child of the Roots music project.

I also note that you've listed "Acoustic music" as a child project of Rock music. Since most acoustic music is not rock music, this probably indicates that you want to make a Wikipedia:WikiProject Acoustic Rock music project instead (which is a much more well-defined field). I recommend rethinking the name and scope of the project. Specifically, the following are acoustic styles; do you want to include them?

All Classical music
Most Folk music and Traditional music

If you want to include non-Rock genres, but not the ones I mentioned, then you might want to consider a Wikipedia:WikiProject Acoustic Popular music project.

-- TimNelson 07:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Activists

Description: This project will help assemble and maintain a detailed database of political, religious and social activists. It will work to insure that the biographies avoid any POV, adhere to the guidelines for biographies and make certain that the integrity of the subject is preserved.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

Comments

Would I be correct in assuming that this project would deal primarily with individuals? If so, then it might most easily function as a work group of Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography. John Carter 13:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Nomination project

Description: In Wikipedia, there are a significant number of editors who wish to apply for adminship but whom do not want to self-nominate. This project aims to allow these individuals to list themselves in an orderly fashion so that others can nominate them.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

Comments

I fail to see how wikipedia would benefit from having such a list. If one wishes to find a "sponsor" for nomination, I think simply requesting an editor review and indicating that you are considering becoming an admin should be enough to hopefully get someone to agree to nominate one. Also, this does, at least at present, look suspiciously like soliciting for approval, which could be counterproductive. We could have a case where people nominate simply on the basis on the list, which basically takes away the purpose of having a nominator, which is having someone familiar with the subject and his/her activity who can dispassionately indicate that they believe the candidate has, as it were, "measured up." I realize I could be wrong on some of these points, and would welcome responses to them. John Carter 00:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That.. seems kind of silly. If you put yourself on the list you are basically nominating yourself, but with a slower process. -- Ned Scott 03:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Admin coaching seems to be where people seeking to become sysops should go. Additionally, you could probably expect significant opposition at RfA. You may wish to raise the issue on the RfA talk page to see what kind of response you might get from such a project. Vassyana 00:18, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree with the comments above ... I do not view this project to be unnecessary bureaucracy. There are already many ways non-admin users can express an interest in becoming an admin, including editor review, admin coaching, and by placing oneself in Category:Wikipedia administrator hopefuls. In addition, there is nothing inherently wrong with self-nominations (at most, one person will oppose for that reason and will be met with significant criticism). -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 05:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Like the above wikipedians. I don't really feel there is a need for this kind of Project. We have Editor review. We have Admin coaching. I think that project would become redundant quite quickly. --Тλε Rαnδоm Eδι τ оr 19:53, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Oversight Board

Description - To try to determine if it is feasible to create a board of administrators and non-administrators, possibly with wikipedia bureaucrats and staff as well, which could act in a judicial capacity to review behavior of administrators, specifically regarding the propriety of their actions, and how such a board could be specifically constituted. The existence of such a board composed of respected non-administrators and administrators alike may be sufficient to forestall questioning of whether a decision made by it is truly fair and independent, as opposed to being a group of administrators who might be seen as acting to reduce the possibility of being sanctioned for similar actions of their own. It also might be sufficient to preempt the possibility of disaffected editors from going so far as to bring civil complaints against wikipedia as an entity or against individual administrators in particular.

Temporary Project Page: User:Badbilltucker/Admin Oversight Board

Interested wikipedians (please add your name below):

Comments:

You might want to get some more feedback about this, even if others gain interest in the project. Maybe a note about this idea should be left on WP:AN? -- Ned Scott 10:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ermm, sounds burocratic to me. -- Selmo ^(talk) 21:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Sounds more like warmongering to me. "Warn me again, and I'll drag you in front of the Oversight committee!" --InShaneee 22:00, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually, I thought of it as more of the opposite. I personally imagine that most of the complaints would be dismissed summarily for lack of evidence or for perhaps small criticism of the admin in question (maybe for using a remotely potentially insulting phrase, for instance), but the simple fact of having an independent body doing so would, I hope, eliminate the number of complaints about admin collusion and suchlike. Much like the average police board, it might investigate a lot of complaints, but in almost all cases they find that there has been no real abuse of power. Also, I don't think that it would necessarily have any real authority, other than that given it by the community as a whole. However, the mere presence of the body and the rebukes it would offer over time would I think be enough to prove that it is independent, and thus hopefully avoid complainants indulging in other procedures, like lawsuits (as has been mentioned before by others), defamation of the admin in question, etc. etc. etc. Badbilltucker 02:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - First of all, I can garentee you that the second this is created, there will be accusations that it's run by 'the cabal'. Secondly, this smacks of a judicial system. Regardless of what power it may or may not be given at creation, you're asking it's members to weigh judgement on other admins. We do have processes to determine this, and simply put, we need less lawyering around here, not more. --InShaneee 16:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - No disagreement to the last point. As stated above, the primary purpose of the group would be to create a body which by its existence would serve to help keep real lawyers and lawsuits getting involved in wikipedia's actions. Badbilltucker 16:23, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - That's what OFFICE does, though. --InShaneee 00:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        Actually, that restricts itself only to content. The possibility of a disgruntled editor who has been banned and later files a legal action based on that ban has been raised more than once, and in the event that any admin were named as a defendant in such a lawsuit even once, and has to hire council to defend his/her actions, I think there is a very real chance of total chaos erupting. That is what this proposal is trying to prevent ever happening. Badbilltucker 00:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        I'm sorry, but I don't see how a wikiproject with no official power on the wiki could have any bearing on a legal proceeding. --InShaneee 03:25, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        I can see this working, It would have the power of the community, and if enough people speak in favor, or not in favor of something, it cannot be ignored. DTGardner 17:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Who currently does "oversight" for the admin? What made you want to create this, have you seen an admin that needed oversight? Yaanch^Speak! 23:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I have, at least one. Ukrained 10:46, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Before an action like this is taken I'd like to see that there is a real need for this. Most of the complaints against me as an admin are from those with no concept of copyright... and if this is the case for most admins then I see this board as getting tired of stupid listening to silly cases repeatedly. When people feel the need they take it up at WP:AN. Are you arguing that this isn't enough? That being said, I don't know how other admins act... but I try to keep my debating a topic completely separate from admin duties. gren グレン 16:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the point. We already have mechanisms for this, ranging from RfC to AN to DR to mediation to ArbCom, depending on the context and the serverity of the dispute. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 17:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I would suggest that this be changed to an advisory and information-seeking board. Like SMcCandish, I do not want to add to the number of overlapping jurisdictions, and I think the general WP feeling is against doing so. But there could well be a less formal channel, in essence a special variant of AN. I see this project as not primarily serving as a place for complaints, but asa pace for collecting information on a routine and ongoing basis, possible programmatically. As for legal issues, I think the existing WP:OFFICE structure is suffficient. DGG 01:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The editor who created the page above seems to be inactive. If I might rephrase the possible set-up, I think it might make sense if this were to function as a form of "evidence gathering" group which might try to find evidence for any administrator abuse of the system which a given party thinks might have been overlooked. I can see it being useful under such conditions. One, if they were to find evidence which had been overlooked which they thought might be considered significant, they could present it to the community as a whole through some procedure for possible future action. Secondly, if they fairly carefully went over the case presented and found insufficient evidence to substantiate any real misconduct on the part of the admin in question and explicitly stated as much, it might help prevent the possibility of nuisance legal action. Most attorneys, after all, will not take a case if there is no hard evidence to support it, and if this group goes over a case and finds no sufficiently "damning" evidence to support a case, then it is that much less likely that the complaint would result in a pointlesss legal action which might potentially get negative press for wikipedia. I think the probability of some such nuisance lawsuit arising, unfortunately, is fairly good, and on that basis don't favor removing this proposed project from the list, even if I do not believe I would necessarily participate in it. John Carter 15:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Considering we already have a mediation committee and arbitration committee, why not make it a reviwing board. The Project could examine and review the progress of admin, and decide if they were still worthy to be admins. Then if the consensus was that he or she was unworthy the Admin could be brought before a beaucrat, and there would be a vote on whether or not the admin should remain admin. If that is to much, why not just have a ranking of the quality of admins by consensus. --Random ^{Say it here!} 20:53, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that it should just be evidence-gathering, and a place for frustrated people to go. I think the next step after that would usually be one of the standard WP processes--I would strongly dislike adding a new one. DGG 03:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alphawiki

Description-This project is both an article building project and a community building project. I have an ambition. To help build a wiki, greater than any other. To help shape the community into the ultimate pride in editing, and such. This project can help make wikipedia elite. The idea of the Alphawiki project is to keep check on the community, and its editors. The first point being an awards scheme. To give all the best editors barnstars. Because there are many editors who work hard all the time and never get noticed. Whilst having its own IRC channel, and it teachers wikipedians to take pride and glory in editing; to hopefully help form articles, stubs, add references and such; and the main aim, is to transform wikipedia into the largest most accurate source of information in the world. Eaomatrix 19:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The basic goal of Alphawiki though is to help build a happy and prideful community, whilst doing helpful maintainence and backlog work and improving articles through reference additions, cleanup, removal of copyright violations, whilst expanding articles. Also reconising editors and giving barnstars to hardworking contributors.

Aims and goals

Help out on editor review.

Help build userboxes, and userpages, help users to assume good faith.

A coaching area for all editors, to help improve wiki and sort out its problems.

Create a new IRC experience.

Help list references for thousands of articles and help promote them to GA and FA

To build an established united community, where people take pride in editing.

Constant updates to the defcon and other facilities, keep wikipedia under check.

Helping out on backlogs. Categories, and such.

To reconise all editors and award barnstars to them.

To teach wikipedians to have pride in editing, so we can make wikipedia something we can be proud of.

To also make wiki Fun (Aswell as having a WP:FUN)

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

Comments

I have no specific objections to the proposal per se, because it so far completely lacks any specifics. It would greatly benefit from having indications of specific procedures and goals. John Carter 20:30, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've been bored ever since Esperanza... Oh. Wait. This is kinda like that, isn't it? Scalene^{•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography style="color:#00F;">Є•} 09:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not like esperanza. Because this one is more focused towards article building; but I would like Esperanza back. Eaomatrix 12:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All these things are already done on a place called "Wikipedia". We do all of these things, but as Wikipedians, and not as a closed group. -- Ned Scott 03:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like the concept in general, but I don't think it would be very pratical. Your plan for the project would be to have a article building, community building, fixing project. I know that that is a simplification, but that is the general concept. I don't quite understand the need for that sort of Project, when we have projects to build articles, the community, and to maintain wikipedia already. --Тλε Rαnδоm Eδι τ оr 19:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American Old West

Description: Goal is to branch off of the Wiki United States project (which the American Old West article links to) and create an entirely separate project dedicated to identifying and improving articles that are based on the often romanticized American history between the mid-to-late 1800s. The topics this project seeks to improve: historical gunslingers, cowboys, historical Native Americans, Western expansion, tall tales, saloons and fronteir entertainment, etc. Also included could be the portrayal of the Old West in modern fiction.

A major focus of this project would be to expand articles on individual figures of the American Old West (gunslingers primarily.)

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

1. Meilander 2. Psdubow

Comments

WikiProject:Appreciation

Description: This is a proposal for a WikiProject in which is similar to the random smiley award but it is not random award, it's main purpose would be to recognise peoples contributions to our encyclopedia, no matter how many or how minor they are, as-well as to make wikipedians know that all of the contributions are greatly appreciated and therefore creating optimism on wikipedia and encouraging further contributions. If there were enough active members I'd be willing to create templates for members to distribute onto other users' talk pages just saying about the project and thanks for their contributions. I'd be willing to help on this myself and create the project page etc and hopefully make it a success with many members.Tellyaddict 15:45, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary project page

User:Greeves/WikiProject User appreciation
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Greeves ^{(talk • contribs)}

Jerry_lavoie (talk • contribs • count)
Comments
I believe the scope of this project is already covered by Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards. Vassyana 01:26, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. There is the Awards Project, and also the Kindness campaign. I don't believe another project of the same sort is neccessary. --Тλε Rαnδоm Eδι τ оr 20:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Isaac Asimov
Description

This is going to be a compilation of everything related to Isaac Asimov (Foundation, robot, and galactic empire series,him,Encyclopedia Galactica, and the Foundation Universe.)

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Perseus282

Nate1481(^t/_c)

John Carter 23:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
I might change the name to WikiProject Isaac Asimov, given the scope you stated above. Also, I'm curious as to whether you would specifically include his other work, including non-fiction books and other fiction, like the Black Widowers, the Lucky Starr series, and others. Would also like to know whether you think this might be viable as a subproject of Wikipedia:WikiProject Fictional series or not. I do like the idea in general though. John Carter 16:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
am going to include his nonfiction and other fiction i just didn't want to list everything.
Australian literature
Description

This project would aim to improve the quality, coverage and accessibility of all articles relating to Australian literature. It's parentage is WP Australia and WP Literature. Currently this area is in such a state that it even got a mention in the mainstream press. (The Australian, Oct 14, 2006) A significant proportion of related articles are stubs, many have not been categorised as "Australian", and the quality overall is extremely low. This project would :
categorise relevant articles so they can be easily accessed for assessment and cleanup

provide guidelines and recommendations for related articles

work with sister projects and workgroups such as WP Biography/Arts and entertainment and Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels, utilising their resources, such as templates and infoboxes, to improve article structure

identify any coverage gaps in core areas

provide a central discussion area for interested editors
Proposed project page

Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian literature
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
User:Baby ifritah

User:Littlepilgrim1

User:Boylo
Comments
I wonder a more general arts/culture project would offer better support for work on Australian literature. It would certainly save having to establish several other small projects on, say, music or visual art etc.--cj | talk 15:26, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
this was considered. i was hoping to keep it to a manageable scale because there is a lot of remedial work that needs to be done. literature itself covers a wide range of subjects which i can envisage becoming separate task forces. also, imo, the types of articles and the knowledge base for other "arts" categories are very different. i was hoping that this would be a good balance between too broad and too limited but i look forward to everyone's opinions. xx baby_ifritah 15:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Banners
Description

A WikiProject to set standards for, and help projects with, WikiProject banners.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Miketm 10:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agathoclea 15:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Wouldn't this be something that the Council could assist with? I would help out with this new WikiProject if it was formed but I don't know if a Project with such a narrow focus is needed.↔NMajdan•talk 16:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, this seems like something that could be better done directly through the Council; we probably don't need more "meta-WikiProjects" at this stage. Kirill Lokshin 18:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Setting this up as a specific task for Council would probably be more efficient. -- Ned Scott 18:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's up to anyone but the projects to design, make, and handle their own banners. Any effort by the Council to manage the banners would have to be approved by all the projects, IMO. --MPD^{T / C} 21:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was under the impression that this was intended as an effort to help projects with the technical aspects of banners, not an attempt to control them. (FWIW, I don't like the latter idea either.) Kirill Lokshin 21:53, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The word "standards" in the description brings up thoughts of cookie-cutter banners. Technical aspects and help is perfectly fine and would be appreciated, I'm sure. Perhaps then, it could be a sub-project of the Council, rather than its own project. I define banners as the template at the top of a page...so it could be broadened to be a more "Templates" sub-project, which would help with all templates needed by a project(unless that's what's implied and I'm not on the same page). Just to clarify. :) --MPD^{T / C} 22:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In that case you might just want to collaborate a revamp of WP:TPT, which could be a lot more useful than it currently is. -- Ned Scott 22:19, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Or WP:WPT.↔NMajdan•talk 23:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When I say standards I'm talking about a naming convention, a starter template that projects can expand and customize and things like that. This project would not tell projects what there banners should look like, or how they should work, but how they can improve and make them work more effectively.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 02:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In reply to Kirill, seeing as how unchecked wikiproject template spamming has now reached levels where it is starting to noticeably degrade the usability of talk pages, I think some measure of control/regulation is necessary. However, it is inappropriate for the wikiproject council to define those standards. As the TFD nomination has shown, the wikiproject council and its members have an obvious bias in favor of wikiprojects, and against what is in the best interests of the average reader and contributor (who are not wikiproject members). Or, as I previously noted, the NRA should not be writing gun control legislation. Raul654 15:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are some bold asseertions here. If this were an article I would definitely tag Raul's statement with {{fact}}. I'd like to see any evidence Raul can provide to back up the claim that "the wikiproject council and its members have an obvious bias...against waht is in the best interests of the average reader and contributor". I think that is a scandalous claim. Force10 15:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see that AGF is alive and well these days. Kirill Lokshin 15:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's not their good faith I doubt - I don't doubt that they mean well. It's the fact that they have an insurmountable conflict of interest. Already, there's at least one bot wikiproject-tagging hundreds of articles per day, and the best solution the wikiproject council has come up with to date is the small=yes non-solution. The *last* thing I want is the wikproject council forming some sort of banners meta-project with airs of authority, setting "standards" which obviously favor its own interests (that is, many large and obtrusive banners which are displayed by default) above the interests of the community at large (which prefers small, uncluttered talk pages). Raul654 16:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Insurmountable conflict of interest indeed! It's not like Council members had any role in developing {{WikiProjectBanners}} or anything like that. I would have thought that our sincerity, at least, would not be in doubt; but it seems that I was mistaken. C'est la vie, as it were. Kirill Lokshin 16:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would only note to the above editor that the person to whom he seemingly directly addressed the above comment created the User:Kirill Lokshin/Sandbox/Template14 template, which if used would probably do more to decrease clutter than just about anything else I've seen to date. John Carter 16:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"which if used would probably do more to decrease clutter than just about anything else I've seen to date." - then I guess you haven't seen Template:WikiProjectBanners, which ((unlike the above) is already deployed and used on 600-or-so articles. Raul654 16:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, actually, I have seen it, as is evidenced by my comment here. The template above referenced by me goes a step further, though, and actually displays the projects' names, something the example you cited does not do, and, at least potentially, decreases the need for interested parties to ever have to see the specific banners, and could, at least potentially, replace them in some cases somewhere down the road. John Carter 16:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um... would WikiProject Banners have a banner? *head asplodes* No, seriously, I don't think this is a good idea. Not even a good idea for the Council, either. This should be done in the Village Pump. Titoxd^(?!?) 23:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we should have this at all. It is not fair for one WikiProject to have authority over how other WikiProjects use banners. Johntex\^talk 15:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like this idea if and only if one of the goals of the project (besides regulating banner styles and whatnot) would be to assist WikiProjects in specializing their banners (with the complicated code most of us haven't learned) to best meet the needs of each project. I know my project could benefit from someone with technical expertise. KSchutte 22:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is needed, but it should be a Council task force. There's no reason to create a new project about this, from my point of view. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 17:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC) PS: I agree a bit with the concerns about control; "setting standards" can be interpreted more than one way. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 17:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i think that there shouldn't be a separate wikiproject, but a task force would be good, not for regulation but for guidance and help with coding. baby_ifritah 00:33, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds to me like the consensus is that we need to expand on Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/Technical notes. This could be called a "Topic Co-ordination" (this is even smaller than a task force). In fact, we could read the section I wrote a few hours ago about Topic Co-ordination, and put that to the test. -- TimNelson 02:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Belarus
Description

This project would aim to clean up and collect articles related to Belarus, with a minimum of conflict, like the stated goals at the Law Enforcement WikiProject. This is a thorny area, but there are projects for hotspots like Sudan and Iraq, so we can accomplish this if there are dedicated folks of all stripes willing to work together.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Chris 05:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Carter 14:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC) = Not necessarily the best informed person on the subject, but I'm generally good with at least biographies.[reply]

Teh Ferret 22:25, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Berlin
Description

This project covers the creation and editing of articles related to the City of Berlin, its buroughs, geography, transportation, culture, history and so on. It aims to expand Wikipedia's resources on Berlin in a fair and accurate manner.
Temporary page
User:Kingjeff/WikiProject Berlin
Interested Wikipedians
Kingjeff 21:31, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Perhaps it would better to create taskforce under wikiproject Germany. Angelbo ^{Talk / Contribs} 22:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Borders
Kimdime69, Poulpy and I are about to start a brand new project dedicated to geopolitical boundaries on the French-speaking version of Wikipedia. In order to do so, we have recently created more than 40 articles — out of 310 — about international borders. As you can see on Frontière terrestre entre le Brésil et la France and on other pages, their content deals with as many topics as geography, history and international law. Thus, they all can become quite large and interesting. Moreover, many pictures and maps can be found on Commons and added to them.
Yet, as it appears that none of the other Wikipedias have followed us down our path, we are now wondering whether or not it is a good idea to go on and set up a project on its own. That's why I am interested in getting your points of view. And also because some help from the English version would be great. Thierry Caro 22:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
ALK
Comments
I hope this message was sent in the right place. If not, feel free to move it accordingly. Thierry Caro 22:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It probably is. I do have a few questions, and my apologies that my own French is nonexistent.
(1) I'm not sure what the explicit "scope" of this project would be. Would it be "borders" per se, the evolution of international borders and related subjects, or what? We already do have projects related to some of these subjects, like Wikipedia:WikiProject Treaties, Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Foreign Relations.
Borders will be the first step. When completed, the project will then extend a little bit, for instance to enclaves. Thierry Caro 14:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(2) Are you specifically asking whether a sister project could be set up in the English wikipedia as well? John Carter 17:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am. We would like to have an international approach on the subject. Thierry Caro 14:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Business people
Description

This proposed project would deal specifically with biographies of people in the field of business and commerce.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
John Carter 16:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrained 10:31, 20 May 2007 (UTC) , interested mainly in developing biographies of the post-Soviet businessmen.[reply]
Comments
This is already covered in WP:WPBIO, might want to get with them on that. -- Ned Scott 07:43, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say it is poorly covered there: no separate department or task force. Or did I miss something in that project? Ukrained 10:31, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and WikiProject Business and Economics. -- Ned Scott 07:46, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, this proposed project could be a subproject to WikiProject Business and Economics as well. A task force in either mentioned Wikiproject would also be great. Ukrained 10:31, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would probably be a task force of both, in a sense, with the name making it a subproject of one and including the sidebar of the other. John Carter 17:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
California Schools
Description: I have noticed that schools, particularly in Central California, have aging information, disorganized articles, or just plain nothing. There needs to be a foundation to standardize these articles, and make sure that there is adequate information for each one. There would be seperate groups (within the Cal School WikiProject) dealing with different counties and general areas.
Project page

Wikipedia:WikiProject California Schools
Interested Wikipedians:
Wikimania1011
Comments:
I feel this is a waste of wikipedia. As my friend often says, Wikipedia is NOT about schools, its about information. Anyway, schools are boring. I should know, i spent years in them. Regards, Zesty Prospect 09:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply to Zesty Prospect,
With all due respect, no one cares about your obvious hate for schools and education... some of us do care about keeping Wikipedia the best Internet information site ever by creating new articles and updating old ones.
Personally, I question whether this group would necessarily require a separate project. Have you considered contacting Wikipedia:WikiProject California and asked about possibly setting it up as a task force or subgroup of that project? John Carter 02:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also WikiProject Schools. Every article that would fall into the scope of this project would already be covered by those two projects. Please consider working as a task force within one (or both) of those groups. -- Pastor David ^† _(Review) 18:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cantopop Music
Description

My Wikiproject is based on information on Cantonese Music. (See Cantopop) This WikiProject includes information of Hong Kong singers, songs, and albums. This WikiProject would help Wikipedia by adding more information, and improving stub articles about Hong Kong's cantopop music.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Stephy100

Smcafirst
Comments (Any questions? I would be glad to answer them.)
Is this WikiProject necessary? Express your opinion?
A:Yes,it will give more information on cantopop music and it will sure make people understand about cantopop music,it will also help Wikipedia because we will make more articles and improve the stubs.
How are you going to improve the stubs?
A:we will research on more in formation on the topic and extend the article to improve it.
How big is your coverage of this WikiProject? Does it extend to as far as 1930s, to the early developement? If not, this WikiProject, to me, would be seemed pointless, as the developement of Cantopop in the early ages is important.
A:My Wikiproject's coverage includes music of Hong Kong Singers and albums and chinese songs.We will include 1930's music,the history of Chinese songs and the development of music.we will include topics like singers,songs,albums,history of music and the music of long ago.To accomplish our goal,we need your help to work on this.
Wouldn't it be a better idea to expand it to Project Chinese Pop? That way you snag the Mandopop fans as well, which would get you more support for the project.
Capitals
Description

Somewhat of a descendant of Wikiproject Cities. This Wikiproject would focus more on Capitals that need help. For example look at capitals such as: Lobamba and Mbabane, Maseru, Praia, Porto-Novo, Moroni, Comoros(simply the worst ever), Victoria, Seychelles, Melekeok, St. John's, Antigua and Barbuda and all other capitals. Goals would also include adding refrences and sources for articles like Bangkok. The main goal would be to bring all capital city articles to FA status(or at least GA status).
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
•Felix• ^T 11:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Carter 14:30, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
See Description above. •Felix• ^T 11:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't a taskforce of WP Cities be more appropriate? - 52 Pickup 11:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure, that's why I want all of your suggestions. •Felix• ^T 11:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good idea, although I also think making it a direct subproject of WP:CITIES would probably be a good idea. Also, you might specificy whether this refers only to national capitals or also to state, province, etc., capitals. John Carter 13:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would focus on national capitals first. If we started looking at regular capitals for provinces, states, districts etc. we would start infringing on the space of Wikiproject Cities too much. So really just national Capitals. •Felix• ^T 14:35, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Charmed
Description

to maintain and improve quality on all Charmed related articles. Similar to WP:BUFFY
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 20:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maelwys 20:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- Huntster ^{T • @ • C} 23:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NeilEvans 17:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Think outside the box 13:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Killswitch Engage 05:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 00:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Chemical compounds and mixtures
Description

So far as I can determine, there is no extant WikiProject which deals explicitly with chemical compounds and mixtures. This includes articles of substantial importance to wikipedia, such as Alloy, Brass, Bronze, Glass, Salt, and Steel. This proposed project would concern itself with the creation, maintenance, and improvement of articles of this type.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

John Carter 20:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

– A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs color="blue">+sign here+How's my editing?)} 01:44, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I think this greatly overlaps with the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemicals. --Itub 08:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I do too. I just noticed that the articles I mentioned, as well as several others, are articles which that project hasn't yet tagged, so I assumed that they were not considered within the scope of that project. If it were to be argued that this might function as a task force of that project, or that's project's scope expanded to formally include these articles, I personally would have no reservations. John Carter 14:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've posted a comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals#Similar_project_proposed to see what the members of the project think. As I said there, I think WikiProject Chemicals covers the "simple" compounds pretty well, but I'm not sure about the mixtures. Most of the examples you give could also be considered materials, rather than "chemicals" (but there is no WikiProject Materials as far as I know). --Itub 15:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I also think that this project would be better handled by the chemicals project and a materials project. I would think that there could be significant cross pollination between them as well. Metallurgy might also be a relevant project with overlap with materials. I just think the scope is better broken up such that individuals can decide on what parts of a hypothetical super-project they would like to be involved in by joining as many as they would like and cross posting when appropriate..--Nick Y. 21:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, we can create a Materials WikiProject. --HybridBoy 06:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Christian Liturgy
Description

Another attempt to diffuse the number of articles potentially covered by WikiProject Christianity. In particular, this WikiProject would cover articles relating to Christian liturgy: articles about rites, liturgical calendars/holidays, vestments/paraments, and anything else covered by the topic of Liturgy.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Pastor David

John Carter

[your name here]
Comments

As I have given thought to this since first posting it, perhaps this would work best as a taskforce of WP:X, and maybe also being related to WikiProject Holidays? In the next few days, I will post questions about this on the relevent talk pages to see if any interest might be garnered. Pastor David ^† _(Review) 18:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree with the task force idea. -- TimNelson 02:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Circus
Description

Covering all aspects of the Circus and it's culture and history from types of acts, stunts, animals and their trainers and handlers, clowns, history, owners, sideshow freaks and other general information about the circus and it's impact on life and popular culture, and help keep articles truthful and nautral (a lot of circus articles have been attacked by animal right activists recently)
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Hailey C. Shannon
Comments

Comics creators
Description

This proposed project or work group would try to ensure that articles relating to creators of individual comic book, strips and other media are created, improved, and maintained.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Emperor 16:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Carter 13:50, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Good idea - I have been doing my best in this area (especially with British creators) and it'd be well worth the focus. (Emperor 16:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]
It could be included as a task force in Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics, because of the genealization principle. --HybridBoy 06:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Companies
Description

Potentially a sub-project / task force to WikiProject Business & Economics, this would work on improving the consistency & quality of articles on companies. I know there are these guidelines but they are difficult to find and, based upon the articles I have seen, rarely enforced except for the biggest cases. I think it is also telling, given the importance of companies in todays world, that there is only one featured article and a handful of good articles.
Specific goals of this project / task force would be:
Look to ensure that articles are created for all notable companies

Ensuring all company articles are tagged for quality / importance

Ensuring all company articles use the company infobox

Expand upon the current guidelines and promote their use

Drive to improve articles so that more become Good & Featured
Scope would be all notable for-profit companies globally, whether public or private, and their predecessors.
To be honest, I'm surprised there isn't something like this already! :-)
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Richc80 13:48, 13 May 2007 (UTC) - as proposer[reply]

Ukrained 09:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
I see the new project only as part of the larger WikiProject Business & Economics where we could additionally discuss and verify our terms, criteria and classification schemes for companies

One more proposed goal: Ensuring proper categorization, listing and content/context distribution for company articles

Regarding the scope: ...including companies , highly important for economic and sociopolitical life of certain countries Ukrained 09:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Confidence Tricks
Description

Currently, there are a stack of articles discussing confidence tricks & artists - from Advance Fee Fraud to Soapy Smith, Hustling to Shill. They have a huge amount of problems that will take time to fix, however. Talk pages are commonly used to discuss the subject, and there is a great deal of cleanup that would be required, such trying to control the amount of people who discuss confidence tricks on talk pages, to trying to make all pages as informative as possible to prevent victims, while still keep the articles encyclopedic. It's bigger than WP:LAW, and deals with issues that are outside it's scope.

User

Scalene^{•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography•Є•} 08:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)

Scalene^{•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography•Є•} 08:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Diletante

GO
Temporary Page

User:Scalene/Confidence_Tricks
Comments

This sounds like an interesting project, but where would we find the necessary sources? I have David Maurer's The Big Con, but it's now out of date -- can you point me to some more recent scholarly resources on con tricks? -- The Anome 08:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]
methinks that sources won't be too hard to come by. Alot of concepts are timeless so old sources are still valuable, it reminds me of the saying "oldest trick in the book." The new scams will get written about in newspapers. -- Diletante 20:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]
Seems not to have a following - I'll keep it around, but it might need to be a taskforce... Scalene^{•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography style="color:#00F;">Є}• 03:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cosmetics
Description: To improve information on cosmetics, especially from the points of view of history, industry, biography and science. To remove the advertorial copy that affects many cosmetic industry articles at present, create NPOV, and add citations. To ensure a fuller context for cosmetics articles, linking to issues including feminism, culture, animal welfare, religion, social history, medical ethics and so on.
User: TinaSparkle 14:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary project page: available at my user page.
Interested Wikipedians: (please add your name)
Bobzchemist 19:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sam195 13:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AliceJMarkham 07:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments: How do we protect against advertorial vandalism? Bobzchemist 19:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I guess that's where we chemists come in, isn't it?--Sam195 13:47, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and we copyeditors too! I think diligence and a sharp eye are the best lines of defence, unless anyone has the skills to write a super cosmetics anti-vandalism bot. -- TinaSparkle 15:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Now that there is Wikipedia:WikiProject Fashion, consider a collaboration. Chris 00:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Within that project, I have suggested the creation of many separate task forces or working groups, and I think this would come under Beauty (which would allow it to include hair, skin and nail content as well). Daniel Case 17:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Costa Rica
Description: This is a proposal for a project aiming to the improving and expanding of Costa Rica-related articles. Articles such as List of schools in Costa Rica and Battle of Rivas (which are extremely important to understand Costa Rica's history and social structure) are left in a permanent stub condition and left with none or vague info. Other institutions, such as Saint Mary High School, have taken of Wikipedia's lack of information about Costa Rica to set up personal web pages or biased articles about themselves. This project would aim to improve and radically change this articles until they are in a professional and unbiased format.
User: Bernalj90 18:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary project page: User:Bernalj90/WikiProject Costa Rica
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name):
Badbilltucker - will try to help as much as I can, which, regretably, may not be much.

Darwinek - created many stubs about geography in the past, still many to write ... - Darwinek 14:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VanTucky

Friendly1013
Comments:
Cruise Ships
Description

This project seeks to organize all articles pertaining to cruising in a decent manner. There are many articles in wikipedia regarding cruising and cruise ships. This project also seeks to further develop the smaller articles as well as maintain the fully developed ones.
User

mmerali

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Zesty Prospect 09:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--HybridBoy 06:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Create it.
DaimlerChrysler
Description

This project will cover all branches and cars associated with DaimlerChrysler. The Chrysler area on Wikipedia is large, so it would be useful to organize it. Some important aspects would include Mercedes Benz, Chrysler, Plymouth, and Dodge.
User

JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 02:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
HaLoGuY007
Comments
A good idea for a task force of an existing car WikiProject. -- Ned Scott 06:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would personally wait until this Chrysler sell off has occured or passed over. It would not make sense to have a DaimlerChrysler project when the two are no longer in communion with one another. Give it a thought... --wpktsfs 21:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a WikiProject for cars, I haven't found one yet.

I prefer a Car or Vehicle WikiProject and better a Green Vehicle WikiProject. --HybridBoy 06:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What to do now that Daimler-Benz is selling Chrysler to <gak> Subaru? - NDCompuGeek 20:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe let Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles make this as subproject, and hope that some drastic happens shortly. And great to see you back, NDCompuGeek! Hope you were feeling better before you found out about the Subaru thing. John Carter 20:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, why is the Subaru thing bad? Chris 23:38, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Database
Description

This project will cover all aspects of databases, including (but not limited to) logical design methodologies, query languages, storage systems, physical design, administration, and security. The information currently available on Wikipedia concerning this important, far-reaching, topic requires the talents of all available subject-matter experts, writers, editors, and those with organizational skills. I propose that the goals of this project should be (in this order):
To improve the quality of subject-matter content by providing verifiable, accurate, and complete subject matter information;

To make the content accessible to a wide audience; and

To provide a better organization and support for the articles that fall within the scope of this project.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
SqlPac 16:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Note that there is a proposed #Relational_Databases project on this page with similar goals. -- Diletante 17:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. That project specifically excludes all non-relational database topics though, such as hierarchical databases, object-oriented databases, xBase-style, XML data stores, flat files, etc. SqlPac 18:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The reason it does is because, with a loose definition, nearly anything can be considered a "database"; XML flat files aren't databases in any real sense. -- Mikeblas 07:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
De-abstraction of Mathematics Articles
Description: This is a proposal to make articles on mathematical concepts more accessible to a general audience through the use of analogies, diagrams, and examples.
Temporary project page: User:Mistercow/De-abstraction of Mathematics Articles
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name): Linus M. I personally think that this project would be excellent. Ketsuekigata Comments:
How does this fit with Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics? This may work better as a sub project of that, it should certainly be mentioned there. I think most members probably support making articles more accessible, as long as it does not compromise accuracy. --Salix alba (talk) 00:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this should support the creation of seperate articles, such as those for both Theories of Relativity? superscienceman 16:20, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree that seperate articles, or at least seperate sections would be advisable. Otherwise, Wikipedia would suddenly become useless to math-nuts. -- Zanimum 18:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean having one technical article, and one non-technical article, that seems a messy work around.Alexnye 08:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This idea — to have separate "simple" and "standard" articles — is already covered by the separation of simple.wikipedia.org and en.wikipedia.org. So don't need "simple" sections inside this one. But improving our articles here is a good goal. In this regard I fully support what Salix alba said. Ocolon 15:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. The issue isn't entirely complexity of concepts, though. Some articles are just written obtusely, and others pay so much attention to technicalities and mathematical precision from the beginning that they drown people who ought to have enough background to read them. Ketsuekigata 01:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm especially annoyed by those that expect the reader to follow along by proving some of the lemmas. Very good technique in teaching a class, disastrous for a general encyclopedia. DGG 03:11, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please keep me informed of what happens; I may be able to help whether in a wikiproject or sub-project or whatever. I have an undergraduate degree in mathematics (and economics). Keesiewonder ^talk 14:02, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Derbyshire
Description

I would like to set up my own project for the english county of Derbyshire. There is a similar one for Cheshire, here [[1]]].
Interested Wikipedians
AxG ^(talk) _{(guest book)}

Erebus555 (talk · contribs)

DDStretch (talk) 18:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Victuallers 13:00, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments There are similar projects for other counties such as Cornwall and Cheshire and feel that one for Derbyshire would be neccesary. I have been living in the county all my life and so =have the other interested wikipedians. We are all experianced wikipedians and we are all knowledgeable of the area and I am sure the project would work. JFBurton 14:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Digital libraries
Description

A WikiProject aiming to tag all pages here and facilitate collaboration on them.
Interested Wikipedians
Bl a st 07.04.07 0615 (UTC)

DGG 03:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
It would be a good idea, but based on open digital libraries in the Internet. --HybridBoy 06:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the usefulness is also to have a directory of paid sites, because that's where the best 1920+ material is. From experience on similar pages, there are going to be spam problems once the existing list gets discovered. What needs doing, besides gathering up all the other ones, is to start writing articles for the 3/4 that do not have them.DGG 03:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dilbert
Description

[description here]
Interested Wikipedians
Umpajug (talk · contribs)

Perseus282 (talk · contribs)
Comments
I'm guessing this is about Dilbert. Would the proposer be interested in maybe contacting Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics to set up as a subproject? I think that group is already familiar with most of the media involved, and it might make the talk page less busy. It also would probably mean less administrative work for the members of this project itself. John Carter 21:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dinotopia
Description

There are wikiprojects for many book series, such as harry potter or lord of the rings. Since this series has about 20 books, and many potential pages to work on. I have already started one new page: Code of Dinotopia. There are many others that can be worked on, such as Skybax, individual characters, places, species, and more. Unfourtuneately, the main place to find info is from the books themselves, so go to your local library if you want to source info for this proposed project. So, what do you think? The main goal of this project would be to create new articles for the series, to promote at least a few articles to good status, and to improve wikipedia's coverage of the series. I mean, come on, wikipedia has coverage of so many other series, why not this one? I typed in the wikiproject's name, so I assume it does not currently exist. There's only about one or two or three articles about this series. Other wikiprojects about book series such as Harry Potter, have like, what, several dozen articles? So, it is now this project's goal, still proposed, to expand wikipedia's coverage of this series. I mean, there's very little reason why this series is not at least nearly as widely known as many other series. If you are reading this and worked on the original article, you might be interested. If you've ever read any of the series and are reading this, you might be interested. So, come on, we, or I, have already created one article, and at least one redirect, which could easily be an article. In fact, someone has already suggested that the redirect become an article. So, it's up to you, to help improve this topic. Sorry if I'm being repeatetive. So, anybody interested? Thanks. – A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs+sign here+How's my editing?)} 01:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
– A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs)}
Comments
The temporary homepage of this wikiproject is here
Discrimination
Description

A project to maintain, improve, guard against POV and ensure NPOV, and define standards for articles about discrimination topics. This would include high-level forms such as Racism as well as specific forms such as Anti-Catholicism. Also maintain the Discrimination template -- q.v. that for other articles some of which would likely be in this scope.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA)

Joie de Vivre Absolutely. It's been on my mind for a long time.

Ezeu 03:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Jeeny ^Talk 23:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Liftarn 12:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Dream Anatomy
Description

Just a first line. This effort does not intend to create one more psychologies, mystic, spiritual, nor a dream interpretation site. All those thing are IMHO, lets say, childish, subjective and kind of unhealthy. Sorry for the inconvenience.
The idea is to collect tagged dream narrations, so they would be content-searchable, and categoryzable. Anyone could contribute with a brand new dream or deviations from existing ones, a clear structure hasn't been still designed. Tags should apply to anything appearing in the dream, from emotions to objects that seem relevant to the story in the contributor opinion.
The result would be worth to surf, a delicious piece of human nature, a nice place available for the very first time thanks to a collaborative engine. Common dreams and nightmares would reveal as common, and the relation among their parts may partially unveil an anatomy of dreaming.
Last words were in oratory's sake... Anyone attracted?
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
[your name here]
Comments
Dyslexia, related conditions and topics
Description

The article "dyslexia" began as a single article, but is clearly going to branch out pretty quickly. I think that a Child Project, or even a Task Force, would be more appropriate than a full WikiProject. I've been looking for a Parent WikiProject, but dyslexia could easily fall into 2, or even 3, larger topics. Some of the topics that branch out from this probably would be better placed in a different category entirely.
The articles that will branch out from this topic will range from eduation law, brain research, neuroimaging, several branches of psychology, neuropsychology, psyciatric diagnoses, special education, learning disabilities, educational methods and instructional interventions, etc.
In addition to finding other interested Wikipedians, I would be interested in determining which if any extant projects the topic could be a child project or task force of.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Rosmoran 20:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Armarshall 00:33, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orbidsku 07:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--Nate1481(^t/_c) 08:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Elena Paparizou WikiProject
Description

WikiProject to improve content and consistency (eg. greek-english translations) on all pages relating to Greek singer Elena Paparizou.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
UKWiki 13:55, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Panagiotis_200715:58, 28 May 2007
Comments
If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 05:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Engineering
Description

A Wikiproject Centering on engineering with a deep base in mathematics and physics, and linked to the Engineering portal. This project would expand engineering knowledge.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Molinogi (talk · contribs)

Ageo020 (talk · contribs)

p27182 (talk · contribs)
Comments ; (Feel free to add any comments)
It is not my area, although 40 years ago I was offered a job in a Chem Eng Dept after teaching their students numerical analysis, but I am amazed that Engineering does not have a WP like the sciences. --Bduke 10:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Create it. And I propose create a battery engineering article and review the relation between automotive engineering and vehicle engineering, including the similarities and differences in both articles. --HybridBoy 06:37, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Entourage
Description: The project will aim to improve the quality and quantity of Entourage related articles, and decide and implement uniform editing guidelines on pages related to Entourage.
Temporary project page: User:Argash/WikiProject Entourage
User: Argash
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name): Also add you name to the members list on the temporary project page.
Sven Erixon (talk · contribs)

Davey4 (talk · contribs)

LoyolaDude (talk · contribs)

Grahamdubya (talk · contribs)
Comments
If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 00:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any TV Series WikiProject?. --HybridBoy 06:38, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How about you go an join EntourageWiki.com, editors and serious members are needed for it become a better source of information.
Environmental and ecological history
Description This project would co-ordinate efforts to expand and create articles related to the historical interaction between nature and mankind. Examples include: diseases (smallpox, the plague, rinderpest, influenza,...) and crops (maize, etc.) with historical significance, events such as the Columbian Exchange, as well as work on articles with a more local or specialised interest, like like the National Park Service or Zoos.
This area has only recently come to the foreground, with the works of Alfred Crosby and Jared Diamond as prime examples. As such, there is quite a lot of room for expanding and improving wikipedia articles from this perspective. Other than those interested in history, biology or geography enthusiasts could also be of great assistance.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Random Nonsense 14:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

It falls within the scope of WikiProject Environment. You can form a task force under the current project. OhanaUnited ^{Talk page} 10:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure a task force is the ideal form for this project. WikiProject Military History is a not a task force of WikiProject History, after all. Moreover, the scope of WikiProject Environment (the effects of humans on the natural environment) does not overlap entirely with the scope of this proposed project. The effects of the natural environment on humans are just as important, and arguably more so. There are other WikiProjects with overlapping scopes (Virus, Biology, History,...) as well - it's a fairly interdisciplinary topic.Random Nonsense 12:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you're familiar with environmental history. First line in the article is "Environmental history is the study of humans and nature and their past interrelationships." As for things you mentioned like National Park Service, we already have and under the scope of WP:WPE. The most reasonable is to become a descdent WikiProject of WPE. OhanaUnited ^{Talk page} 13:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes, and it is true that the field does entail such subjects - I did note that there were overlaps. :) However, the wikipedia article is a bit limited - when you look at the works of the 'big names' of the field, e.g. Alfred Crosby, or what is taught to those studying it [2] you will see that it covers much more than that, and also involves the historic impact of diseases and the introduction of Mesoamerican crops in Europe, for instance. I don't know if all that is covered by WikiProject Environment, but I'd say it could just as easily be a task force of WikiProject History, if it is to be a task force.

I also note that the "study of humans and nature and their past interrelationships" is different from "the effects of humans on the natural environment". For greater clarity, this project could be retitled 'ecological and environmental history' - to cover all nuances. [User:Random Nonsense|Random Nonsense]] 13:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I have to agree with OhanaUnited that these subjects are best covered by WikiProject Environment in combination with relevant wikilinks, including to specific scientists. I see the overall theme as a global one. I also see human life and interactions as an inseparable part of the natural environment. Who was it said 'Everything which occurs in nature is natural'?Aeronian 21:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mmm, well, I can only repeat my previous remarks: the field entails more than the effects of humans on their habitats and involves quite a lot of other disciplines, and that if it were to be a task force, it might make more sense to make it a task force of WikiProject History (a WikiProject which already has such specialised side-projects as WikiProject Military History and WikiProject Australian maritime History, but that as an aside).

While I do have an appreciation for the view that 'Everything which occurs in nature is natural', it seems to abstract away a lot of the essence of the human experience: the cultural and the attitudinal. This is what I mean with 'it entails more than the effects of humans on their habitats': it includes that, but also goes into things like the impact of the introduction of potatoes on the Industrial Revolution, or the influence of maize on 'the American Character'.

However, all that said, since there seems to be a consensus that this would work better as a task force, I'll ask (in about a fortnight, after the exams) on WikiProject Environment (and perhaps WikiProject History) if the people there support it and could see it work... Random Nonsense 23:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Evangelion
Description
This project will aim to coordinate any and all information related to the anime series Neon Genesis Evangelion (including The End of Evangelion and Death and Rebirth) as well as spin-off material. Recently, the amount of Evangelion material on Wikipedia has greatly increased (I wrote up an episode guide...) and also, the Rebuild of Evangelion is not far off on the horizon. In anticipation of this Rebirth of Evangelion interest which will effectively double the amount of storyline relating to this immensely popular series, we need a way to coordinate it all.
The project will aim to improve the quality and quantity of Evangelion related articles, and decide and implement uniform editing guidelines on pages related to Evangelion.
This project would cover the four major current "continuities" of Evangelion; the original anime series continuity (which for convenience, also includes the alternate ending of End of Evangelion), the manga adaptation by Sadamato, the Rebuild of Evangelion, as well as the possible Live action Evangelion movie series.
This is warrants a full-blown Wikiproject as opposed to merely a task force, because there is a great deal of information, Rebuild will soon double all of it, and we need the help to set up an "Evangelion Portal" on Wikipedia.
Temporary project page: User:Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici/WikiProject Evangelion
User: Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name):Also add you name to the members list on the temporary project page.

Willbyr (talk | contribs) 02:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Twilight Goddess 15:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Radioactive afikomen (talk · contribs)

Gatotsu911 (talk · contribs)
Comments
Sounds like a great idea for a work group of WP:ANIME. -- Ned Scott 03:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not really; the Futurama WikiProject was too big to be simply a work group of the TV WikiProject, etc. --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici
That wasn't the reason Futurama become its own WikiProject. -- Ned Scott 23:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I've said before, I believe a WikiProject adds quite a bit of overhead to matters and adds little, and so at most there should be a work group. --Gwern (contribs) 17:02 6 June 2007 (GMT)
External link descriptions
Description

This project is focused on ensuring that external links have proper descriptions attached to them - that is, instead of cryptic page titles, links should describe their content, and where neccessary, the source or stance of the target. Unlike Wikipedia:WikiProject External links, this project is not about the potentially contentious area of adding or removing links, but purely about labelling the content of links correctly and informatively, to prevent conscious or unconscious bias/confusion. Special attention should be paid to high edit/high view articles, and possibly an aim should be to construct a proper set of guidelines for all external links.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Fangz 20:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Football (soccer) in the United States of America and Canada
Please offer suggestions for a better name (preferably shorter.) The scope of the project includes improvement of all the soccer leauges, such as the MLS and USL, in Canada and the USA. Also included would be their national teams. The project would also develope articles on players, coaches, and other influencial figures in the game. XYZ CrVo 02:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary Project Page User:XYZ CrVo/WikiProject Football (soccer) in the USA and Canada

Interested Wikipedians (please your add name below)

Jazznutuva 06:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Oaf 13:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canadiana 15:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

м info 23:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
D. BULL 12:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments Feel free to leave any comments

Possibly name project WikiProject North American Football (Soccer) but suggest we just add a sub project to Wikipedia:WikiProject Football since it's already established. Jazznutuva 06:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the name suggestion. I'm not clear on the structure of WikiProjects - when a subProject is better, when it should be its own thing, etc., so I'll defer to the experts on that. Bill Oaf 13:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You don't want to say "the USA and Canada"; see guidelines at Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Acronyms and abbreviations: "When including the United States in a list of countries, do not abbreviate the “United States” (for example, “France and the United States”, not “France and the U.S.”)." I'm good with North America which you can easily defines as the United States and Canada. Existing articles on soccer specific to the United States and Canada use "soccer" rather than "football" and I think that is consistent with Wikipedia principles regarding spelling and usage, but that is certainly a good topic for discussion if we had a project page. Canadiana 15:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the title should definitley be Wikiproject North American Soccer as in North America football is football. м info 23:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Wikiproject North American Soccer would definately be the best name. --wpktsfs 02:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would add a section about female football and competitions in Northamerica. --HybridBoy 06:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Frasier
Description

The project's goal is to improve the main article Frasier, and to create new articles for the episode list and also to expand the characters articles.
Temporary User page

User:Bernstein2291/WikiProject Frasier
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Ageo020 18th March 2007

Bernstein2291 20th March 2007
Comments
If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 00:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it is that narrow. Remember Frasier has over 264 episodes and there are no articles for half of them. There are Wikiprojects for the Simpsons as well as Fawlty Towers which just has 12 episodes.--Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 22:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Frisians
Description

Co-ordinated information about the Frisians, their historical lands, languages, etc.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Benne ['bɛnə] _(talk) 19:01, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Duck 19:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 08:06, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Murlock 18:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
It sounds like fun, this project. I'd love to be a participant all the way up from the beginning. I think Fryslan deserves to have its own project, and I think many people would like to share the same opinion with me! I should say; look at this, tell every Frisian wikipedian that you know, and give this proposal some notice on this great site! Many great Frisians troughout ancient history all the way up to modern times, need to have recognision on wikipedia. People such as Grutte Pier, Ygo Gales Galama, the Galama-family, the Schieringers and Vetkopers, Tierck Hiddes de Vries, and much, much more! Today is the day! Now is the time for us Frisians to combine and create our long-rewaited project! We are standing at the start of something new, something great; Fryslan boppe!
Murlock 09:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps there's enough information for Fryslân to deserve its own project, but I thought it would be nice to combine information about all the Frisians, also in Germany.

Any suggestions for a name? Frisians or Frisia? --Benne ['bɛnə] _(talk) 23:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Frisians! Absolutely, now doubt about that! And I am very proud of being a member and starter al the way up from the beginning! Your idea is great, Benne, it sure is! Frisians! Our own project! A great thing. I'll be happy to help. Allways, -)-(-H- (|-|) -O-)-(- 13:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Future
Description

This WikiProject will mostly be aimed toward articles on inventions and society of the future. Articles on multiple futuristic inventions will be included. Articles on futuristic society will also be included...What will cars be like? What will the clothing be like? What will the people be like? Are there robots? Basically, this WikiProject is about the future.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Proposer of WikiProject: Swannie 02:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
--HybridBoy 06:58, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
This sounds remarkably like and attempt at WikiProject Crystal-ball. Too much speculation involved. Pastordavid 18:16, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Create it, with prolongation of date obtained from the present. There is a lot of articles about "the future of..." and we can include researches in the field of study. I like the invention idea, but not the society part. --HybridBoy 06:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the proposal some merit, but that it would have to be very careful regarding what it covers and says. Speculation about "the future of abortion", for example, even if it is exrtremely well documented, is likely to cause endless battles over what should and shouldn't be included. Having said that, information on the future of technology (and possibly the future of the planet, the universe, maybe even evolution) would generally meet less resistance. John Carter 19:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Furry
Description

Taking GreenReaper's idea of a WikiProject for furry-related topics, I decided that it would be prudent to try out the waters and see if there really is all that much demand for it. I don't think I'd be interested, really, but that's only because I'm a recent addition to the fandom, and I don't have all that much knowledge about it, its roots and its goings-on. Bl a st ^{[improve me]} 17.06.07 0008 (UTC)
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
GreenReaper 20:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NeoFreak 21:46, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EarthFurst 23:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xydexx 00:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arf! 00:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I think the presence of WikiFur: shows that this is a reasonably-sized topic. Category:Furry Wikipedians already exists and would provide a pool of editors to draw from. Category:Furry demonstrates the sort of articles that would fall under the project's remit. GreenReaper 20:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The project has been needed for some time. The furry fandom related material is a mess, it's all over the place. With a project proper verification and sourcing could be organized. It also holds alot of promise for the organization of transwikiable material to be moved to a more proper venue. There is a huge community of interested editors for the project already in place. NeoFreak 21:46, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Galápagos Islands
Ultimately, with or without the á, this is a project I wanted to start a long time ago, and never got around to. Although WP:ECU already exists, I think there is sufficient content unique to the Galápagos to warrant a separate WikiProject.
Project page (proposed, would be)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Galapagos or Wikipedia:WikiProject Galápagos Islands — Input welcome here—the format for which I borrowed quite heavily from WP:WPWI. :-p
Scope

To include all articles related to the Galápagos Islands, e.g, Geology, History (human), Biology, etc.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Proposer :-) Tomer ^talk 02:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kitia 20:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments. Please sign your comments with 4 tildes (~~~~)

Get a task force from Wikiproject Ecuador. Teh Ferret 22:26, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. --HybridBoy 07:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Geometry
Description

A WikiProject covering polygons, polyhedrons, geometric shapes, angles, and any other mathematical topics related to geometry.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Kamope · talk · contributions 22:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eskimospy 15:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ALK
Comments
I think this is a good idea (I'm surprised it already didn't exist), but I'm afraid I'm not particularly interested in Geometry. :-P | AndonicO ^{Talk · Sign Here} 00:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This would be better off integrated into Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics (as a task force or otherwise), I think. Kirill Lokshin 23:35, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what's intended to be included in this WikiProject's scope. The examples in the description above — "polygons, polyhedrons, geometric shapes, angles" — are all covered in high-school Euclidean geometry. There's a lot more to geometry than that: see the article Geometry for a taste, or the list of geometry topics for a partial list. So I'm not sure whether the description above is meant to imply that these topics are not in the scope of this WikiProject, or if they were merely chosen as examples of topics that will also include Bruhat-Tits buildings, the Hodge conjecture, and so forth. (I'm just seeking clarification, not meaning offense.) —msh210℠ 04:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Create it! Definetly a broad enough topic for WikiProject. Also like msh210 said, you can add to the description stuff about hyperbolic and elliptic geometry, and also mention the fourth dimension. --eskimospy (talk • contribs • review me) 00:00, 27 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]
WikiProject Ghana
Description

This WikiProject would be dedicated to finding and improving articles related to Ghana as well as being a focus for editors who work on articles about the country. The project would encompass all articles about Ghana including history, politics and others. There are a lot of articles related to Ghana which either lack references or need to be improved. It would be under the umbrella of WikiProject Africa. There is already some support from de:Wikipedia:WikiProjekt Ghana about this.
Temporary project page

User:Natsubee/WikiProject Ghana
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Natsubee 14:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Allison Stillwell 15:33, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Would this be able to get enough participants to function viably? Use WikiProject Chad and WikiProject Nigeria as reference points. Picaroon (Talk) 20:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Global Democracy
With the human rights portal in place, discussing human rights around the world, it seems right that there be a similar portal for democracy (or lack of). The voting rights or suffrage of every country on Earth could be profiled, with a chronological history of the spread of democracy. I'm relatively new here so technical help would be especially appreciated. Thoughts?
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Josh

Crested Penguin 07:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--HybridBoy 07:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 02:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Perhaps expand to Human Rights for a broader appeal. Chris 08:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think democracy should have its own wikiproject Crested Penguin 07:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Create it now. --HybridBoy 07:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've long believed that WikiProject Democracy or a "civics and democracy" taskforce of WikiProject Politics has been sorely needed. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 02:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Global Warming
In the last few decades, the Earth's average temperature has gone up by 1 degree. This may not sound like much but is taking a toll on our environment. Over 80% of our glaciers are now gone. The main goal of this project will be to expand the number of articles related to global warming itself and informing the average person of what would happen by relating the warming in everyday topics. Anyone else interested?

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
ALK

Psdubow
Comments
Great idea! I would be willing to help. I think maybe we should team up with the Wikiproject Environment on this and they some of the members might be willing to help us. Psdubow
Possibly. Let's see what they would think of it. Meanwhile, I'm still waiting to see if anyone else is interested. ALK
Sure. You're right, we should probably wait, you know, until some more users get on board. Please keep me posted! Psdubow 00:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Will do! ALK
Gorillaz
Description

The articles related to Gorillaz are a mess. The band members pages sound like they are written by rabid fangirls, and the singles contain irrelevent trivia.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
The Swagga
Comments
If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 20:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much! I don't know much about Wikiprojects. That suggestion was very helpful. The Swagga 19:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Guster
Description: This WikiProject will help to create, expand, and complete articles about Guster and their music, as well as related articles. It will work on articles about Guster's songs, EP's, compilations, members, and tours.

Temporary project page: User:Hmwith/Wikiproject Guster

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
hmwith talk

Darkedge
Comments: If this goes ahead, I'll try and help as much as I can! -Darkedge
Why do people clearly ignore the note at the top of this page? If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. A Guster project is very broad, and should be a taskforce (only if there is enough interest). RobJ1981 22:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But there are Wikiprojects for many other bands. Why not Guster? - hmwith talk 06:48, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For one, the scope is limited. Second, there is an Alternative rock WP. Third, just-because-there's-an-x-about-x is never a good reason on Wikipedia, especially with a band like this. I just looked it up, and, see reason 1. Chris 07:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, how do you go about making task forces? I don't see any in in Alt Rock WP. - hmwith talk 16:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you look in the "relatives" boxof that project's page, or on the WP:PROJDIR/MUS page, you will see that that project already has a Pixies task force. John Carter 02:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Harmonised Classification of all Wiki Articles
Description

The classification of all relevant articles according to the WCO's harmonised notes and addition of an info-box to the aforementioned articles with the relevant heading. This will involve many thousands of articles. This is a universal standard in international trade from which all local tariffs are taken from.
Interested Wikipedians (user:librarianofages)
librarianofages
Comments
Huh? Wassis mean? I think it might help if it were clarified what the WCO is and maybe included a link to which kinds of articles might be so classified, with maybe a link to the classification scheme. John Carter 00:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WCO stands for World Customs Organization. Here is more information Harmonized System. Solarapex 02:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Who will update the articles when the classification changes? It seems this happens frequently. --Kevinkor2 04:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What is the relation with Taric code ? --HybridBoy 07:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Historical novelists
Description

to maintain and improve quality on all subcategories and listed author articles. I want to categorize all of the authors there. Put them in seperate categories about time period, type of novels and depicted region or country. I need more help on this task. I'v done substantial work myself. Also, I am a Bulgarian and I see the lack of any Bulgarian novelists as highly undermining. But I suppose I'll be the only one working on it.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Painbearer my contributions my talk page 16:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

21:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Comments
Homestar Runner
Description

[This project will try to improve all articles related to the flash cartoon series "Homestar Runner"]
Interested Wikipedians
Wikizilla ^{(Talk)signme!} 20:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
There are many Homestar fans out there, and if we joined up, we could benefit wikipedia.
Too broad of a scope. It should be a taskforce as per what the top of the page says: If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. I don't understand why people just choose to ignore what it says. RobJ1981 21:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest RobJ1981 meant to say "Too narrow of a scope" instead of "Too broad of a scope". --Kevinkor2 10:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hotels
Description: I'm proposing this WikiProject as I feel that the hotel articles on Wikipedia could benefit from such a coordinated effort. The project would aim to collaborate and direct the efforts of editors interested in improving and building upon hotel articles. The primary aim of this WikiProject would aim to establish a structure and consistency with hotel-related articles. I'm aiming to keep this as broad as possible at this time - open to suggestions.
Any comments regarding the proposed creation of this project would be much appreciated.
Temporary project page: User:Luckyluke/WikiProject Hotels
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name):
Luke! 05:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MCB 06:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Patricknoddy

GavinTing
Comments
I agree with Luckyluke. I think this Wikiproject would be very helpful to a lot of articles. I say get going and start it! Good luck with the creation. Chupper 23:33, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would add GPS coordinates and, when possible, photos (so it also could serve as GPS car navigation). Create it--HybridBoy 07:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
House, M.D.
Description

A WikiProject for the show House, M.D. Although there are a lot of pages for the show, I feel as though we could really improve the overall quality of the episode synopses and the such with a dedicated group of people. Right now, there is no continuity between pages and I feel that we really need to rectify this.
Interested Wikipedians
Allison Stillwell
Comments
As the note at the top states: If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject.. RobJ1981 05:56, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The television show Heroes has its own WikiProject and it's only been on for one season. House has been on for three seasons and therefore has a much wider pool of information to dive into. If you feel that House doesn't merit its own WikiProject, then what WikiProject do you feel that it would fit under, oh guru? Allie 15:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In general, it is agreed though that when the scope of a proposed project specifically already falls within the scope of another project, in this case Wikipedia:WikiProject Television, that it both reduces the amount of talk page clutter and redundant activity to take advantage of the existing infrastructure of the larger project. The fact that some well meaning individuals create an entirely separate project, some of which wind up being moribund fairly fast, is no really good reason to copy them in that regard. John Carter 17:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hungary
Description

an expansion of the now-inactive and very small-scoped Wikipedia:WikiProject Historical Hungarian counties, using the original framework but expanding to include other things in this populous and unique European nation. There is an existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Hungarian culture, the national project would seek to cover other topics-politics, biography, flora and fauna...
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Chris 08:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Carter 19:18, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Intelligence Agencies
Description

Within the scope of the project would be all the intelligence and counter-intelligence (domestic and international) agencies/organizations of the world (CIA, MI5, Mossad, KGB, etc.), their operations, their leaders and operators, etc. This project is to also include government, political and commercial intelligence operations as well as private intelligence companies.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Kimon (talk · contribs)

Perseus282 (talk · contribs)
Comments
Internet (by country)
Description

Someone created this long article on the Internet, its history, and usage in the People's Republic of China a while back. However, other "Internet in x-country" articles were lacking, and the country-respective sections in Broadband Internet access worldwide were insanely huge. I spun them off, but I guess copy-pasting is discouraged in favor of migrating the sections AND their edit histories into new articles. The reason why I've started on it is because there is a dearth of formal WP coverage of the national/geographic origin of websites and Internet phenomena, and the stuff which are available are disorganized and non-contextual (I created an Category:Internet and Japan category yesterday to group together 2channel, Futaba Channel, and .jp, among others. But these articles need quite a reform, which is why I'm proposing a WikiProject for "Internet by country" articles.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Toussaint (talk · contribs)
Comments
Inter-religious content
Description

There are a number of articles which relate to religion which clearly deal with more than one religion. Unfortunately, the majority of the religion projects deal specifically with only a single religion, and may not be qualified to provide a fair view of a given inter-religious article. This proposed group would attempt to deal with these subjects by trying to bring together good editors familiar with a variety of religions who could try to hammer out a way to present all the faiths involved in these articles, in a fair, non-POV, accurate way. I acknowledge that this may be rather difficult to do, but that is all the more reason that the attempt should at least be made.
Temporary page

Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/Inter-religious content task force
Interested wikipedians (please add your name)
John Carter 16:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

C.Logan 02:02, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sefringle 01:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

George 15:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Richard 17:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Itsmejudith 22:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fullstop 08:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
How is this any different from Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion?--Sefringle 22:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The project you mentioned deals with this content, but also deals with several other kinds of content as well. I think this proposal would actually best fit as a subproject (task force) of that project. Its specific goals would be more focused than those of that project, specifically dealing exclusively with content that crosses religious lines. John Carter 13:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I have created the page. Why don't you expand the task force page.--Sefringle 01:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this would probably work best as a TF of WP Religion. Pastordavid 15:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've long been wanting to create a Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy of religion to unite theist and atheist Wikipedians who want to work on neutral and high quality articles on issues related to the existence of God. I'm currently very busy in real life, but I still wonder what people think about this idea. It's a bit related to inter-religious content, but the focus would be on the intersection of philosophy and theology, so it would be a sub-project of WikiProject Philosophy. Any comments? --Merzul 17:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Philosophy of religion below. John Carter 17:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Given that WikiProject Religion is not a large project in terms of members or frequency of postings to its forum. Suggest having one and only one place where issues of concern affecting other religions can be addressed. Not all Wikipedians interested in religion are also interested in inter-religion issues. Having multiple small and specialized task forces to address various sub-concerns would likely confuse general editors, who wouldn't know where to take a concern to, could lead to overlapping forums for the same issues, and could exclude essential points of view, resulting in administrative POV forks with folks of particular views coalescing into particular groups. Right now WikiProject religion, while not moribund, doesn't have such a large amount of activity as a forum for discussion of issues to make subdivision practical. Best, --Shirahadasha 16:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Could the proposers of this project identify a single specific example of a problem that such a proposal could solve and why this approach could solve it better than present methods? Currently each religion more or less has autonomy over its own issues, with cooperation on obvious joing articles like Abraham and Bible. How would the proposed approach create an improvement? Best, --Shirahadasha 16:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Saint contains material relevant to a variety of religions, but is to date tagged with the banners of few if any of them, leaving the remaining content handled by people who could easily misstate something. Also, there will be specific cases where, from for example my field of saints, a statement regarding the subject's previous religious affiliation, which might be non-Christian, could be stated in sources in a way which is less than completely clear in sources. This might be particularly relevant if that religion has no specific attendant WikiProject, and a lot of faiths qualify in that area. It would also allow for editors who are primarily interested in a given faith, which may or may not have its own separate project, to address these religion-specific matters, without also having to deal with articles dealing with Santeira, Bahai, and some of the other specific religions the parent project deals with. John Carter 17:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Japanese Rock
Description

[This WikiProject will mostly deal with Japanese rock musician pages such as those of Gackt, hyde, Dir en grey, and X Japan. Other musicians similar to those will also be included.]
Interested Wikipedians
SeventhHaido 09:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

L337p4wn L337p4wn 11:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We need this quite badly. The pages for some of Japan's greatest musical acts on the international stage are a gigantic mess.
Japanese Royalty and Nobility
Description

This WikiProject will focus on the unique and timeless institutions, customs and people as it interacts with this most modern nation.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Chris 09:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Journals
Description

This project will focus on improving the number and quality of articles about journals and other academic output.
Temporary Project Page

User:Jayvdb/Journals
Interested wikipedians (please add your name below)

Strong support. I have written many articles on chemistry journals. Let me know how it goes. --Bduke 10:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DDStretch (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC) I can offer some help with respect to Psychology, Psychiatry, Medical Research, Statistics and some Mathematics journals if required.[reply]

Strong support--I've done this sort of thing in the RW for years and years, & I can give what help people want me to give--I am familiar with both science and humanities publishers, and with most of the RW projects. DGG 02:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

Create it. --HybridBoy 07:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Kinks, The
Description: This project would focus on the creation, expansion, and maintainace of articles related to british rock band The Kinks.
Temporary project page:
None at this time.
User: Painbearer
Interested Wikipedians: Painbearer
Comments: If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 00:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How many pages would The Kinks actually need? I don't think a whole project is needed just to maintain a few articles.. Perhaps this would fall under the musicproject?GavinTing 07:45, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Davies brothers don't have good articles in my opinion. In terms of influence and musicality and stuff, the articles are simply undermining them. That's what I think. So, I would like to enlist the help of some fellow editors, that's all, on expanding the articles of the albums, including, the Davies brothers as I've mentioned and a couple of more. They are highly influential band and it is just very undermining to have such small articles. Painbearer 21:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Kinks is a "B", Ray Davies and Dave Davies are both "Start"s, so you're right they're not very good. But there are only 53 total articles in the Category:The Kinks, which might not be enough for a stand-alone project. I think contacting either WP:MUSICIANS or some other group and requesting a task force might be the way to go, as 53 articles really isn't enough cause to create all the project pages, templates, etc., involved in the creation of a project. John Carter 22:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Law & Order
Description

This project would focus on Law & Order and all of the spin-offs like: Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, Law & Order: Criminal Intent, and Law & Order: Trial by Jury. Some areas of the Project would be: episode data and order, character information and updates, news and currents events, information about cast members, creating templates, organizing information, expanding articles, and creating a comprehensive and detailed guide to the Franchise in general on Wikipedia. Psdubow 23:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Psdubow
Comments
If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 20:13, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you are right. But, this is just to see if anyone would be interested in joining. Psdubow 20:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Lawyers
Description

This is a proposed project dealing with the subject of biographies of people in the legal professions, be it lawyers, law enforcement, judges, or others involved in the practice of law and law enforcement.
Interested wikipedians (please add your name)
John Carter 17:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Newyorkbrad 19:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

.V. 20:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Psdubow 15:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Would it also include professors of law? --Legis (talk - contributions) 19:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good question. Am I wrong in thinking most professors also function, in at least a "sidelight", as practicing lawyers as well? If that is true, then clearly it would. Where that isn't true, that would be a question for the members to decide, but I would see no inherent reason to say "no". John Carter 19:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like this idea, as well as including law professors. .V. _[_Talk|Email] 20:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's also that many lawyers are associated in some way with a law school, and do part time teaching or group projects or clinical work--I've seen th term "clinical faculty" more and more. This is parallel to the very well-developed medical structure.DGG 02:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Lead Paragraph Cleanups
Description
The problem of lenthy lead paragraphs here on wikipedia is becoming very serious, perhaps 20% of all articles open with very long segemented and complicated lead paragraphs. I propose to manage a group to work on tagging and cleaning up a large number of the articles with lead paragraphs that are either to long or too short in accords to WP:LEAD. Tasks will entail, tagging, editing and bringing discussions to a consensus on the issues relevant to the topic. The appropriate length of a lead depends on subject of the article. This is an important matter since the "lead" immediately grabs the attention of the reader. to meet quality standards.
User: Frummer
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Frummer

Filll

Nishkid64

Sam Dorrance

Scholarus

--HybridBoy 09:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Random Nonsense 15:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
I agree, create it . And in science and technology, we could create a divulgation WikiProject.

Lyrics
Description

This WikiProject, if given the OK, would be to add the lyrics to articles about songs, if any. I feel it would give readers a better idea about the songs if they have not heard it before... of course, the lyrics would have to be referenced from a realiable source.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Mario Sonicboom Jump! Slash! Dash! Ouch! 16:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Comments

Be very careful with this one, and follow Wikipedia:Lyrics and poetry. Chris 04:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, "adding the lyrics to articles about songs" is definitely not OK. Quoting a line or two in a commentary is acceptable, but copy/pasting the whole thing is a copyright violation. Zetawoof_(ζ) 21:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Although some older songs which either never had or have had copyright lapse might qualify, like maybe John Barleycorn, I agree that for most songs inclusion of lyrics is a great way to get the lawyers rushing the metaphorical door of wikipedia with summonses in hand. John Carter 00:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. With the type of songs that could have their lyrics added, this would almost be best as a task force of Wikipedia:WikiProject World music. -- TimNelson 01:44, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Use Wikisource:WikiProject Lyrics. You also can add *.Kar (Karaoke) MIDI files to Commons. --HybridBoy 10:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
M*A*S*H
Description

This project would be to further expand the M*A*S*H franchise. Possibly help expand the characters, add more episodes, and not have them in the red links, and the movie and books.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
J.P. Casey

Mikecraig

Chris 06:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sarsaparilla39
Comments
Okay, now this is a TV project I can get behind, one that has staying power for a decade of shows and 35 years of cultural influence. support. Chris 06:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Agree with Chris and seeing that there is a lot of actors..etc associated with M*A*S*H, having a WikiProject is a good idea. --Mikecraig 06:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maccabiah
Description

This project would be to futher expand the Maccabiah Games. Researching results, the history of the games etc.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
NYC2TLV
Comments
Madagascar (country)
Description

The goal of this WikiProject would be to describe the animals, geography, climate, people/society, and government of the African country Madagascar. It would aim to clean up (edit) articles relating to the country, expand articles such as stubs, and to create articles in need of creation. This WikiProject would enable a better understanding of Madagascar.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Proposer of WikiProject: Swannie
Comments
Malaysia
Description

This project would aim to manage, clean up, collect and edit articles about Malaysia. There are many articles on Malaysia which need work, for example, many articles are lacking references or lacking altogether. This project covers a country, which of course is a very important subject in it's own right. This project would help to improve the general quality of articles about Malaysia and it is surprising this project has been started yet. However, since I am relatively new to Wikipedia, I thought it would be better to see if this idea has any support before attempting it.
Proposer of WikiProject: ???
Interested Wikipedians ( please add your name here)
Chris 05:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Image:Msia-crest.jpg is about to be deleted WP:NONFREE, please help source it. Chris 04:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Masters of the Universe
Description

The original 1980s series He-Man and the Masters of the Universe still has a huge following, and the revival of the seris in the early 2000s saw a resurgance of interest in the franchise. There are currently around 200 articles relating to the various aspects of Masters of the Universe and the related He-Man and She-Ra TV series. All pages can be accessed via the category page. Overall there are some really good articles, but others are lacking in information and citaions. The purpose of the WikiProject would be to coordinate the expansion and improvement of the articles so that they meet Wiki standards with regards to verifiability etc.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
NeilEvans

Annie D
Comments
If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 20:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Microformats
Not knowing of this page, I recently created Wikipedia:WikiProject_Microformats to allow and encourage the discussion, deployment and documentation of microformats in Wikipedia. Andy Mabbett 15:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile Phones
Description : This WikiProject would be for the improvement and standardisation of Mobile Phone articles. Many of the exisiting articles lack category boxes and there is a distinct mix of info boxes across the entire range. I therefore propose a project be created to offer standards for all mobile phone articles.
Interested Wikipedians
ELaverick

--HybridBoy 11:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mathiastck

OhanaUnited ^{Talk page}
Comments

Which boxes do you propose ?. --HybridBoy 11:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The category is thriving: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mobile. Mathiastck 01:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This one looks like it can take off any moment. I'll sign up for this. OhanaUnited ^{Talk page} 10:28, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Monk
Description : This project would create episode data for the Monk episodes, as well as character updates, and other things of that sort.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
WTRiker-Talk to me

GavinTing

Psdubow
Comments
If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 23:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, certain TV shows have their own projects, such as The Simpsons. Monk seems popular enough to me, so I think it should deserve it's own project. Correct me if I'm wrong. =D GavinTing 10:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Better a Task Force. --HybridBoy 11:07, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Articles for individual television shows seem unjustifiable to me. Few individual episodes are noteworthy in any way, and are only included on Wikipedia to prevent fan revolt. The inductive logic that says an episode is noteworthy just because its actors or show is noteworthy is inherently flawed. -- Mikeblas 12:39, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mythbusters
Description

This project would focus on creating standards for recounting each show, giving biographical data for all hosts, describing each myth, and better organizing data for the Discovery Channel sho Mythbusters.
Temporary project page:
None at this time.
User: Jaypenguin150
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Jaypenguin150

– A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs)}

Swannie-I like the idea!

ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever-In responce to JuWiki, we could make each episode have it's own article, like most TV shows.

NDCompuGeek
Comments
MythBusters has only about 20 articles on Wikipedia. Now if it had more than 100 articles on Wikipedia, I would approve it, but MythBusters is way too small for a WikiProject right now. If this project was created anyway, it would probably be deleted (like WikiProject The Naked Brothers Band). Wait until MythBusters grows bigger. — JuWiki (Talk <> Resources) 21:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is too specific. what about setting up as a task force instead? baby_ifritah 00:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Names
Description

The purpose of this project would be to develop all the articles related to certain given names, nicknames, and family names. We would try to develope more articles to the standard of William (name)
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Remember 18:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hailey C. Shannon
Comments
Very, very, very, very interesting. --necronudist 18:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See the proposal below at People Name Origins. Chris 23:54, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I created Wikipedia:WikiProject Anthroponymy. Let's see how it goes. Remember 21:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
National economies
Description

This would be a subproject of Wikipedia:Wikiproject Business and Economics focusing on the several national economy articles, like Economy of the United States. One goal is to increase application of Template:Infobox Economy with fresh data (currently it is only used 53 times, the other pages taking a disorganized approach). Another goal would be to organize and update the text of the national economy articles, many of which need to be cleaned up, separated into proper sections, and expanded. WikiProject Economics and WikiProject Business and Economics are not really working on national economies, instead focusing on articles about businesses and the study of economics.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
LittleDan^talk 20:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Nicaragua
Description

Wikiproject to create and advance pages related to Nicaragua. Also, in helping advance the Portal:Nicaragua that i recently created. There are alot of articles in need of expanding and creating.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
— User:LaNicoya\^talk
Comments
North American Fresh Water Fishes
Description

This project would be designed to complie information on the various fish and the ichthyology of fresh water environments of North (and possibly) central America (in an effort to narrow Wikiproject Fishes).
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
--Ryan shell 21:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oceanography
Description

WikiProject Oceanography would serve the need for improvement of current and creating missing articles related to oceanography. It also will standardize articles under the auspices of the project. Additionally, it should help recruit collaborators and increase exposure for interested editors to contribute. Similar projects are Meteorology, Tropical cyclones, and Climate change.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Evolauxia 21:34, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quizimodo 23:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SatuSuro 02:00, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thegreatdr 18:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Oceanographic articles are currently lacking and is one of the few major physical sciences that dos not have a WikiProject. The main oceanography article is currently under the ausspices of WikiProject Geography and related articles are within various projects but often are not in any.
I am not sure if it is appropriate for the proposed project - if the legal/political aspect of ocean definition was standardised on wikipedia it would be excellent - but a huge number of edit wars, and incorrect usage of totally out of date or inadequate sources pollute articles with xxx is in yy ocean - when they are not - from old or badly created atlases and info sources - if it was possible to have adequate template reference points for ascertaining ocean nomenclature for the planet - then for me that alone would justify a project that might have such a section/template/standard by which to battle what appears to be very geographically challenged misinformation. Satu Suro 02:05, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A dedicated oceanography wikiproject is looong overdue. I have already given thought to an oceans/seas infobox (modelled on the country wikiproject) in articles for each major body of water, with locator maps (which I can create), etc. (Note: I created the animated GIF of 5-4-3-1 oceans.) In absence of any other authority (or perhaps because of that), these would be based upon the definitions and boundaries indicated by the International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO). Other aspects, like prescriptions for consistent structure/section titles, can be adapted from existing wikiprojects. Quizimodo 08:57, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It would certainly help out articles such as coral reef, which I recently added info to from Climate of Florida. Thegreatdr 18:51, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
People Name Origins
Description

This WikiProject would primarily aim at describing where various first and last names (of people) come from and what they mean. It would also improve articles about names of people, and add more information to the articles. Many people wonder where there name comes from, and this would be a great opportunity for them to find out. If names are put into this encyclopedia, then a person can come and look up their name here.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Swannie (proposer of the WikiProject) 00:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
While I think the *idea* is a wonderful idea, I think this project belongs on Wiktionary. See http://en.wiktionary.org/. -- TimNelson 01:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many such articles under several heritages are already part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation, perhaps you want to give those folks a jingle. Chris 03:11, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the proposal above at Names. Chris 23:55, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I created Wikipedia:WikiProject Anthroponymy. Let's see how it goes. Remember 21:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Philosophy of religion
Description

This proposed project would deal with content relating to the Philosophy of religion in an NPOV, non-biased manner.
Interested wikipedians (please add your name below)
User:Merzul - proposer

John Carter
Comments

This proposed project would probably be functionally a subproject of both Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy and Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion. However, given its stated scope and goals, it would seem to be more directly relevant to the Philosophy project. John Carter 17:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pixar
Description

Pixar Animation Studios have created some of the most memorable films of modern times, but its article and that of its films require a lot of work. We need to rewrite lots of parts, define what references and trivia are acceptable and reach our ultimate goal, namely that we get Pixar and its films up to Featured Article quality. Our secondary objectives are articles related to people related with Pixar like John Lasseter, Joe Ranft and Steve Jobs. Anyone else interested?
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Proposer: RMS Oceanic 09:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Driveus

--$UIT 17:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A•N•N•A hi!

wpktsfs 03:02, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Martini833 01:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bernstein2291 02:53 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Comments
I wasn't sure if this should have been a task force, but since we're looking to improve at least eight articles (and more, as the films are released) I felt that was sufficient to warrant a project. RMS Oceanic 09:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to join up as a task force or child project of Wikipedia:WikiProject Disney. -- Ned Scott 00:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That seems fine.--$UIT 04:56, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pixar has quite a few articles, and it needs its own WikiProject. I know almost everything about all the Pixar films, long and short, and would be more than glad to join. Since Disney has nothing to do with Pixar, it should not be a part of the Disney WikProject, and it shouldn't be a part of WikiProject Films, because that is way too broad. I would be more than happy to join. A•N•N•A hi! 18:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anna, I disaggree. Disney has lots do do with Pixar. However, I do aggree that Pixar should have its own wikiproject. I agree with SUIT that it might work out best as a child of Wikiproject Disney. Lets discuss...--wpktsfs 03:02, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So how about the Pixar Taskforce?--$UIT 00:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iºm not sure about taskforce. I think it would be better as its own project, albeit a child project of Disney. Basically, noticible enough for a Project, and linked enough with Disney to be a child project. Thoughts? RMS Oceanic 09:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It needs it's own WikiProject since some of their short films are not Disney branded. Martini833 21:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There's always Wikipedia:WikiProject American Animation as a group with which this group could associate. And, considering the current scope of the project is, as stated above, eight articles, I really question whether at this time there is sufficient content to justify an entirely separate WikiProject. John Carter 22:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's more than eight, really. It just so happens those eight are the highest priority of the project. There's also the dozen or so short films they've created, character pages and current and past employees of note. We woudn't be the largest project, but I reckon we'd have plenty to keep us occupied. And remember: more films will come out each year. RMS Oceanic 06:33, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You know maybe if someone tracks down all Pixar articles and add them to the project list then we could have the project up and running quickly. I know for sure they have 10 films, 15 or so short films, countless character and director pages, and some uncategorizable pages. So i would say it amounts to (at least) 30 to 50 pages. That is definately enough for a WikiProject. (addition) There could be a WikiProject for all Pixar movies since they have sooooo many articles each so why is a Pixar project such a big problem? Martini833 20:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't that it's a problem. It's that there already are a number of full Projects out there, and that it's both easier on the people (me) maintaing the directory, and probably easier on the members of the project itself, if they allow an existing project to handle the "paperwork" of the project (assessments, banner, potentially peer review and collaboration) and allow the members of the more focused group more opportunity to focus their attention on the content. The only real functional differences between a task force and a WikiProject are the name and the banner on the talk page. It's already the case that many of the full banners are being hidden in the {{WikiProject Banners}}, so that functionally leaves the only real difference the name. Personally, as someone who was proposed and/or created three task forces for Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity, (Iglesia ni Cristo, and Methodism and Baptist on this page) it's easier and less time-consuming to create a task force than a full, stand-alone project, particularly if, as in this case, the proposal basically deals exclusively with content which is already within the scope of another, existing project. John Carter 14:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This should be a taskforce, not a project in my opinion. As the note at the top says: If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Making only a few number of films isn't that big of a scope for a project. Why is that hard to understand? Instead of making tons of tiny projects: use taskforces, then the related project can help out and so on. RobJ1981 22:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Pocket pets
Description

A descendant project of Wikiproject Mammals. Scope would cover all small mammals traditionally considered "pocket pets" potentially including the fancy mouse, fancy rat, guinea pig, ferret, gerbil, sugar glider, rabbit and hamster.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
VanTucky

Ahc

youngamerican

John Carter 23:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Teh Ferret 20:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC) ferret is a pocket pet?[reply]

User:The Eggplant Thief So long as rabbits are included ;D
Comments
I might change the name, as it is at least to me kind of unusual. But I certainly think it is a worthwhile idea. John Carter 14:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The name is necessary because it is the only noun for this category of small pet mammals, which do not all fall in any taxonomic group together beyond small mammals, which is pretty vague. Pocket pets is a specifically defined group. VanTucky 23:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As it seems the minimum of five members to create a project page isnt happening, this project is on hold until we meet the requirement. VanTucky 23:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If they are all mammals (I think they are), has anyone considered maybe creating this as a task force of Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals? John Carter 23:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the task force idea, but why not make it WikiProject Rodents instead? That covers just about every animal mentioned besides the rabbit & sugar glider. - hmwith talk
The only real differences I can see are the 200 or so articles dealing with the rabbits, and the fact that the rabbit and sugar glider aren't genetically tied to the rodents, but to other families. I personally can see a fairly good argument for both alternatives. John Carter 20:35, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know, that's why I said "That covers just about every animal mentioned besides the rabbit & sugar glider." - hmwith talk 20:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consider making this a project of Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals. Chris 21:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why it needs to be a task force. Wikiproject Mammals is just an oversight category for other Wikiprojects under its purvail (such as Wikiproject Dogs). It doesnt actually contribute that much. And besides, it is too busy with more important tasks than standardizing, expanding and monitoring the content balance of small mammals kept as pets. As to the name, pockets pets is a dictionary accepted term for those specific mammals kept as pets. Not all of them are rodents, and even if they were, it focuses on only those kept domestically. Rodents is too broad. Seems we have more interested members now, I think I'll get to creating a page. Any help with a project talk template (and maybe a userbox) would be great considering I don't know step 1 about how to do those things. Oh, and this isnt too narrow to be its own project in my opinion. In fact, it is an expanding group. I think Degus should be considered within the scope as well. VanTucky 21:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Political Scandals and Controversies
Description

A project dedicated to accurately describing past and current political scandals and controversies so that readers will have an accurate account of the facts and sources
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name
— dkatten 16:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

— Sholom 17:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

— --Uncle Ed 19:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
I think this would be a good project for a focused group to work on so that current political scandals and controversies have accurate information and are done in a NPOV way. Because so many people rely upon wikipedia to get access to current controversial information, it is important that we make sure to provide the best information we can. Remember 15:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have time to do this now so someone else please take charge. Remember 15:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I believe a group focused on political scandal has a very strong possibility of becoming a de facto decider of fact and the potential to become a POV hit-squad. I think the idea is well intentioned, but I just see too many potential problems with a group dedicated to scandals & controversies (groupthink, POV, infighting, etc.). I respectfully decline the offer and hope that this project does not meet with the fate I predicted. Good luck! /Blaxthos 16:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it will be just the opposite of that, Blaxthos. The purpose, as I see it, is to identify when there is a controversy and then to prevent a Wikipedia article from trying to "decide" facts. I've been a Wikipedian longer than 99.99% (I am user #188), and the perennial problem has been a groupthink which has the effect of making Wikipedia endorse certain POVs. If we try, we can counter this trend. --Uncle Ed 19:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point, but looking from other side of the looking glass, I would hate to see this group become the self-appointed "guardian of what's right." I've seen (most notably in AfD discussions) a particular organized group or wikiproject able to organize enough support / likeminded editors to dominate WP:CONSENSUS discussions (becoming the de facto authority). High minded ideals aside, the obvious solution would seem to be what Lincoln did in the civil war days -- include enough viewpoints in your council that none shall dominate. I think, however, that such a group which consciously forms to become the deciding body is inherently dangerous. I'm glad to see its stewardship in experienced / capable hands. :-) I still must respectfully decline. /Blaxthos 19:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion there are probably more "controversy" articles than we really need (at least in certain high-profile areas, like American politics), and I hope that this project could narrow these down and improve their quality, rather than see a proliferation of new "controversy" articles.--Pharos 19:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it is a very good idea, if the main focus is on addressing POV and source issues, but it depending on how it runs it could be quite vulnerable in the ways User:Blaxthos mentioned. I do however think it's worth the attempt. baby_ifritah 00:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Product Design/ Technical Information
Description

An attempt to create, better and categorise articles related to product design, but not exclusively industrial design. These would include information on designs/products, design theory and design tools/ resources. Emphasis given to technical information/data, such as:
specifications

manufacture process

diagrams, schematics and pictures
and any other legitimate useful information.
This resource would be useful to consumers, designers/engineers, DIY hobbyists and enthusiasts. There is a lack of quality technical information on Wikipedia, however there is a lots of knowledge out there that could be harnessed by the wiki format . I feel there is no reason Wikipedia shouldn't have better design resources.
I understand there are issues of pages may get bloated by “excessive” technical information/data and so a solution would be short summary in the main descriptive article with a complimentary detailed technical page. This technical page could link to relevant resources (manuals, guides and tutorials} in Wikisource, Wikibooks, and on external sites. It would link to various Wikipedia projects, portals and categories. A portal “Product Design” would be developed:
[3]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Chendy 01:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Project Banners
Description

Many articles need a wikiproject template on their talk page. This greatly improves their chances of, well, being improved. This project would also deal with the improvement of wikiproject banners. A wikiproject coordinator could just come to this project and ask for help on their banner. I've asked for a bot that could compile a list of these articles. This request can be found here.
Temporary page

User:The Psychless/Temp_work
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Psych less 20:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
We already have a small group which is trying to ensure that all articles get assessed here. If you can get that bot up and running, we can then try to get some of the relevant projects to try to do assessment drives like Biography is now doing. Thanks for the work there, by the way! We could probably talk some other projects, individually or collectively, to do some assessment drives if they had several more articles bannered. John Carter 21:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This project would not deal with assessing articles. It deals with tagging articles with a wikiproject's template. It is their responsibility to assess the articles, if they participate in assessment. --Psych less 22:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. But getting the articles tagged in the first place would be a great help to a number of projects. John Carter 22:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Isn't that my point? :) --Psych less 14:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Provide Alternatives to Technical Jargon (Divulgatiion)
Description

There is an understandable tendency within any specific profession to use shortcut words to help make communication quicker and clearer between the experts in that profession. Unfortunately, in an encyclopedia, that's a bad thing, since the goal is for the encyclopedia to teach general consumers interested in self-educating about those specialized concepts, and that insider-driven jargon tends to alienate or intimidate outsiders.

The overall mission/goal for the project would be to keep technical articles accessible to non-expert readers. While technical jargon specific to any field can keep the prose concise and accurate, the unfortunate side-effect is to increase the amount of effort required for a non-expert, or a person not part of that scholarship to understand the topic and the encyclopedic prose.

My contention is that if Wikipedia truly is for the masses, as Wikipedia:Wikiproject Countering systemic bias and Wikipedia:About seem to imply, it's our responsibility to keep language clear and accessible for all of the people who would use it. I don't think it's necessary to stamp out the use of technical jargon, but I do think it's possible and would be helpful to provide parenthetical or footnoted alternate explanation for those who might not understand the technical jargon.

For example, while editing an article recently in the Medicine WikiProject, I was struck by the term, "Psychosocial Morbidity" used to describe a possible developmental symptom of Klinefelter's syndrome. While the term does not mean that a person displaying the symptom necessarily has a terminal illness, it would be easy to draw that conclusion from the terminology. It would be helpful, perhaps, to insert a parenthetical comment into the article, or a reference, that talks about how the "morbidity" of the term talks about the psychological self not developing fully and doesn't address the topic of literal death at all.

Similarly, it could conceivably be just as important to a new scholar of military history to know that there is a difference in accuracy and other traits between a musket and a rifle, or a bow and a crossbow.

Additionally, it's possible for the heavy use of technical jargon to hide NPOV issues in articles, and for that reason as well, it would be good to try to make the details of an article something everyone could easily understand.

As with all of these kinds of semantics issues, there are obviously poor ways to go about compensating for the issue and good ways, and it would be an interesting challenge with worthwile results, I think, to try to address dynamic this within Wikipedia itself.
Interested Wikipedians
MalcolmGin (talk · contribs) 21:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--HybridBoy 11:09, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

I would create a (Science and Tecnology) Divulgation Project. --HybridBoy 11:09, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Recently Deceased Biographies
Description

A biography on wikipedia gets a lot of attention right after a notable person dies. The purpose of this project would be to help get that article up to a high standard and monitor the site so that those that stumble upon wikipedia for information about the deceased person would see our best quality product.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Remember 14:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tom M. 20:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SailorAlphaCentauri 15:29, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
There's no topicality to bind users together is there? There's no way this is a viable WikiProject imho. What it could and perhaps should be is a page within WikiProject Biography. Just create a page for interested users to congregate at. You don't need any project banner or anything as you won't be claiming "ownership" of any pages ("recent" soon expires, after all). --kingboyk 14:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, I disagree that it is viable. While there is no topic to bind people, there is a uniform mission (i.e., to make sure that all biographies of currently deceased people are up to a certain quality and maintain that quality during the period that they have the most traffic). Remember 02:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC

- I agree with Remember, that it IS viable.Tom M. 20:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Consider adopting Template:Recent death. (SEWilco 16:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]
This should be a taskforce of the Biography project. A seperate project just for recently deceased people is a bit broad. RobJ1981 20:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reference Desks
Description

A wiki project to help maintain and improve wikipedia's reference desks.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Comments
Reggae Project
Description

[To inprove apon and create articles related to Reggae, Dub and Ska. I feeel at current there are to many articles on the subject that are too short and lacking in detail, I do try and make inprovements myself but I think a project is needed]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
AJUK

User:Hailey C. Shannon
Comments
Relational Databases
Description

There are many database topics on Wikipedia, but they are incosistently formatted, generally need cleanup for content, POV/neutrality, and are poorly referenced. They are also not very well organized and sometimes hard to find.

I'd like to get working at collecting them, but it's a task bigger than me alone. First, building a list of the involved topics is necessary. The project includes topics releated to database administration, database technologies, SQL programming, alternative languages, relational theory, database theory, and probably a few other areas.

The project strictly does not include non-relational databases (such as object stores, flat files, and so on). It does not include specific instances of databases, such as those found online or commonly used as services.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Mikeblas 21:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--Kevinkor2 00:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Diletante
Comments
I'm a little mixed about the scope. Maybe "relational" is too limiting. I think the scope includes all of thes subects in {{databases}}, plus many more. -- Mikeblas 12:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recently proposed a #Database project with similar goals, which would encompass non-relational databases as well. I too feel the scope should be broadened to include non-relational databases (hierarchical databases, object-oriented databases, XML data stores, and flat files to name a few). SqlPac 18:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
XML data stores aren't databases in any real sense; while some circles hold them in vogue, they have to be read sequentially, aren't relational, aren't OO, and so on. "Databases" alone also leaves the door open to instances of databases, as I mention above. I'm fine for increasing the scope to other viable technologies, but flat files just aren't interesting. -- Mikeblas 12:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Religious leaders
Description: Many religious leaders, particularly founders of new faiths, arise from an existing religious tradition. However, the wikipedia content relating to this figures will generally be added in primarily by adherents of the faith the person founded, not those from the faith s/he arose from. On that basis, I am proposing a group which I anticipate would be a work group of either (or both?) WikiProject Biography and WikiProject Religion to help ensure that these articles are addressed in a comprehensive and NPOV manner.
Project page:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/Religious leaders work group
User:
Badbilltucker 15:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians:
Scifiintel 23:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--$UIT 02:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Carter 23:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC) - We definitely need a biography group for religious figures.[reply]

I would definitely support this as a task force of WP:Religion and WP:WPBIO, and help out as I am able. Perhaps it would help if we could first come up with a definite scope - i.e., what classifies a person as a "religious leader" (for our purposes). Pastordavid 18:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--HybridBoy 11:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments:'
I agree and think this is very important and needs to be put in place in order to help facilitate others having a better understanding of different religions and cultures. Scifiintel 23:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose we could use the functional defintion of those affiliated with the "clerical" professions (possibly including rabbis, priests, and other ministers) as well as the more obvious "lay leaders", although no examples of the latter come immediately to mind. John Carter 00:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is now a rough temporary project page listed above. I can't believe how complicated these biography pages are. But if the group does get formally recognized, I will do everything I can to fill it out. John Carter 22:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revolutions of 1848
Description

In 1848, liberal, nationalist, idealistic and republican revolutions swept across Europe. All the revolutions eventually failed, but nevertheless, the years of 1848-49 were a monumental turning point in the history of Europe, and their repercussions are being felt to this very day. I am terribly dismayed that Wikipedia's coverage of these revolutions is so poor and I appeal to all Wikipedians interested in the history of Europe to join in this project. Next year marks the 160th anniversary, and I for one would like to see our set of 1848 articles vastly improved by that time.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
K. Lásztocska 21:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chris 09:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

K issL 12:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Εξαίρετος (msg) 15:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

István 20:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Harrypotter 08:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Rhodesia
Description

to improve and preserve articles related specifically to this area prior to 1980
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Chris 07:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Carter 19:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
With the proliferation of national WikiProjects, even one for Austria-Hungary, 90 years gone, would there be enough interest to justify such a project as this?
You might want to check with the proposed Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Eastern Africa group first. Personally, it seems to me that there may be more editors with interests in Europe than Africa, and that might be why the Austria-Hungary project exists. It might be a better idea to create the larger group first, and then, when it is known whether there is enough interest, to create task forces of that larger group. Badbilltucker 15:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Austria-Hungary project appears to be inactive. Since you want to deal with pre-1980, such a project can also be part of WP Former countries. - 52 Pickup 20:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is now Wikipedia:WikiProject Zimbabwe. Chris 22:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Richmond, Virginia
Description

to improve all articles related to Richmond, Virginia
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Neldav 21:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
My suggestion would be to use the existing framework of the WP:Va. Just make a post asking for collaboration on a specific Richmond topic, and keep doing it with every subject related to Richmond. ~ (The Rebel At) ~ 14:28, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just my experience from WikiProject Australia, but we found getting activity happening for any city/metro region with less than 1 million people was pretty difficult. There are several examples under our umbrella of noble-intentioned yet failed projects due to scope issues and a lack of committed local editors to raise the bar on content and quality. The projects for larger regions, however, have proven successful and active both in raw article terms and also in attaining FA/GA status for some. Orderinchaos 02:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Roads in New York City
Description

This Wikiproject will be dedicated to expanding pages about roads and bridges in The New York City Area
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Bernstein2291
Robotics
Description

WikiProject Robotics- This project would incorporate all the robotics articles together and improve/clean them as with all WikiProjects. UAV's, industrial and domestic, as well as military robots would be covered. Developmental aspects would be covered. Also components of robots, (motors, microcontrollers, electronics) would be covered. Finally, locomotion systems, electronic theory, artificial intelligence and generally anything else in the scope of robotics would be covered. The regrettable thing is, I am nowhere near competent enough to do such a project. So if anyone is interested, and knows how, please start it up!
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
NightFalcon90909 19:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Maverick423 16:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ph0t0phobic 19:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--HybridBoy 11:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hailey C. Shannon
Comments
I used to make small robots and all that good stuff when i was younger. So i know i can help out here =) Maverick423 16:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very good. Go ahead. Perhaps can we add also automation? --HybridBoy 11:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Robot Wars
Description

A WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles Robot Wars - things like individual robots, international competitions, etc.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Ka5hmir^{Talk To Me!} 09:24, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
If the scope of your project idea is very narrow (such as a TV show, music band, video game, etc) then you should start a task force of an existing project instead of starting a whole new WikiProject. Chris 09:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Runescape
Description

We could like update people on what is happening with runescape and help with the holiday events
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
[Elderleo]
Comments
They have a website to "update people on what is happening with x and help with the holiday events". It's called MySpace. This is Wikipedia, an encyclopedia. Thanks for coming out. Chris 23:59, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In all fairness to the individual who proposed this, the "holiday events" is something specific and a part of the Runescape culture. Jagex tends to add special items and "mini-games" to Runescape that is only available during a specific holiday season, usually Christmas and Easter, as a way to try and encourage continued interest in their games. Documenting these holiday events is an interesting aspect of this game, especially as the items tend to be unique and often can't be traded, with the exception of the very notable party hats from a Runescape anniversary event. In this case, players could only get one party hat, and none of the new players after this event could get them, causing these items to become a sort of tradable hedge against inflation within the game. These are the most expensive items in the game in player to player transactions.

I don't know if there are enough articles related to Runescape to warrant a full Wikiproject, but there certainly are many devoted fans to the game. Wikipedia notability standards would certainly apply to most of the topics of Runescape, and it seems unlikely to significantly expand the number of articles beyond what is currently on Wikipedia. There is a Wikia wiki about Runescape that would be much more appropriate for pushing into other topical areas regarding this game, including holiday events. The Runescape Wikibook was removed as a part of the bloodbath removing all of the video game strategy guides, but the StrategyWiki does have the original Wikibooks content. --Robert Horning 21:31, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There was a WikiProject RuneScape, but that it now the RuneScape task force of WikiProject MMO. Greeves ^{(talk • contribs • reviews)} 14:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Steely Dan
Description: This WikiProject is for (you guessed it) Steely Dan. Right now, only is the Steely Dan article itself lacking information, but the albums' articles are not formatted properly and disorganized. Finally, most songs are missing as articles (and the ones that do have articles don't have infoboxes and such), which is a shame, since most Steely Dan songs are quite deep and their unique lyrics make them interesting to analyze. So what do you say? All you Steely Dan fans out there sign up!
User:
Nauticashades (talk · contribs)

Temporay Page:
User:Nauticashades/WikiProject Steely Dan
Interested Wikipedians: (please add your name)
Sign up at User:Nauticashades/WikiProject Steely Dan also

BabuBhatt (talk · contribs)

Daniel Case (talk · contribs)

Theoldanarchist (talk · contribs)

DrDevin (talk · contribs)

Chadbryant (talk · contribs)

Fenrir2000 (talk · contribs)
Comments:
Very narrow project. Just ask on talk pages for help about Steely Dan. Wikipedia isn't a place to make fan clubs. Ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Music for help as well. If there was a project for every popular singer or band here, Wikipedia would be overrun with too many narrow projects. RobJ1981 01:14, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Concur Baristarim 17:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You might check with one of the larger projects in the field about possibly setting up as a task force or work group. Badbilltucker 14:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Synthesizers
Description: This wikiproject aims to document synthesizers and their use in popular music. These instruments have played an increasingly important role in shaping the musical output of artists over the last 50 years. They have also spawned completely new genres of music as musicians work with electronic instruments exclusively. Unlike general classes of instruments, such as guitars, each model of synthesizer is engineered with the ability to create unique sounds and each is therefore a unique instrument in its own right.
User: Mperry 19:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary project page: There is no page as of this moment.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name):
Phantasy Phanatik
GreyCat: I'd like to join and help this project, starting with most basic theory about synthesizers - such as describing all major components, synthesis types, algorithms, then proceeding to individual pieces of equipment / software.
pacmanfever

iguana_nirvana14

pacman997
Comments:
This could also be a task force of the Musical Instruments Wikiproject.... - NDCompuGeek 03:02, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Television children's shows
Description

I've noticed that TV show articles are vandalized a lot, and since children's shows hold a startlingly high percent of this; some have not had articles made. Users in this project would monitor children's show articles that they know well and make sure that everything is in check and has not been vandalized, and create pages for shows lacking them and monitor them. P.S. I would need help making this. Superx 00:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Superx 00:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

– A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs color="blue">+sign here+How's my editing?)} 01:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Expressing interest
Having just spell-checked and copy-edited the above description, I would anticipate that if this project did go ahead it should be under Children's television shows although it doesn't have much support yet... Mdcollins1984 14:13, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thrash Metal
Description

Thrash Metal is a genre of Heavy Metal music that has seen some levels of mainstream popularity, and as a result there are a lot of bands of this genre. As in, hundreds more (notable) than are listed. I would say that a Thrash Metal WikiProjected is warranted to have full focus on the Thrash Metal article, as well as all related articles, within reason.
Purposes of this group are as follows, but not limited to:
Add/Create new articles related to notable bands/artists under the thrash metal category.

Revamp some articles relating to notable bands/artists completely (where need be, of course).

Patrol the articles in question "constantly" to make sure that they aren't vandalized bit by bit to the point where they're filled with false information or deceptive links.
This has been suggested many times before, and I think that all articles relating to Thrash Metal would definitely benefit from this. The WikiProject for Heavy Metal would be pointed out in the first step as making this seem rather unneeded, but WikiProject Heavy Metal has a broad focus, whereas we want to have a slimmer focus. If we focus on one as opposed to many, the articles will benefit. Maybe being a sister project of WikiProject Heavy Metal?
Any thoughts, concerns, support, etc. are welcome.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Nonviolence
Comments

Tornadoes
Description

A project to organize, standardize, and improve articles on Tornadoes and other severe weather phenomena.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
RunningOnBrains 20:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

– A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs color="blue">+sign here+How's my editing?)} 01:55, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--HybridBoy 11:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
This would be a sub-project of Wikipedia:WikiProject Meteorology. See there for more information.

Better call it natural disasters. One would add to it information about disaster prevention and prediction. --HybridBoy 11:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also give a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Disaster management. Chris 00:07, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Trucks
Description

The purpose of this WikiProject is to co-ordinate articles on light, medium and heavy trucks. It aims to improve the coverage of manufacturers and models, and to make articles on trucks uniform and informative.
Rotten Stone 13:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary project page

User:Rotten Stone/WikiProject Trucks
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Kieran T ^{(talk | contribs)}

Fabio^Talk Definatly agree, there needs to be a more uniform article structure on trucks and i think a project may accomplish this.

G®iffen likes to help, but it's probably not much from me as mentioned below

Hasannur OK, I'm interested and willing to help

Tepoo I agree with projects description. I'm willing to help but regrettably I don't have enormous amounts of time to contribute towards this project.

--HybridBoy 11:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Trucks
What's wrong with the current article that we need a new project? Peter Horn 16:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Copy and paste of a comment on Rotten Stone Peter Horn 16:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Compare Automobile and Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles to see the worth of a project which draws people in to the breadth of the field. – Kieran T ^(talk) 17:15, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with the main article about trucks. However, if you compare with the coverage of automobiles, aircrafts and trains, there are surprisingly few articles about various truck models. To be honest I also find most articles on truck manufacturers rather thin (example). Of course this won't be solved by just adding a new project, but a project will help make new articles more conform and thereby of grater value to the readers. It will also be easier for users to add new information or new articles if there are suitable templates, like infoboxes, to pick from. Rotten Stone 17:47, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Following the example link I see that Unimog is well overdone compared to the other models...

I miss some more country-specific details on rules etc. to the truck-article. About models I see that Volvo is even worse, I actually started up one model with a photo only in the hope that sby would feel provoked to write the text to it (since I don't have the faintest idea of model history - I only drive the things). My problem on a truck project would be that
I have a work without computer

I have 2 small kids taking a lot of my home time

I work mostly at the da:Wiki, especially when it comes to technical articles, since my school-english didn't include technical terms.

Anyway I think a project could help this subject, but I am afraid I cant help as much as I would like to :-( --G®iffen 17:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, there's a temporary project page up and running. Please visit, and feel free to comment on the talk page. Rotten Stone 16:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
comment What about broadening to cover all Road transport, as a parallel to WikiProject Trains? Or should that be in the scope of WikiProject Transport which appears to be essentially inactive? --Scott Davis ^Talk 13:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If it covered road going trucks, trailers, buses, motorhomes and perhaps implements (ie everything not covered by the existing automobile and motorbike wikiprojects), I think that it would have more chance of gaining the member numbers needed for viability. I've looked at this proposed project several times and concluded that, as currently proposed, its scope is too narrow. --Athol Mullen 06:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Create it. And a link to the bus WikiProject (or we can initially join them). --HybridBoy 11:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unicycling
Description

This project would help promote and coordinate articles related to unicycling and unicycles. It would provide a location to outline and enhance the structure of existing and future articles, and it would perhaps be similar to the existing projects: Wikipedia:WikiProject Cycling and Wikipedia:WikiProject Motorcycling.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
AndrewDressel 18:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mathmo

User:RMBradburn
Comments
Existing articles include:
Unicycle

Eunicycle

Impossible wheel

Robotic unicycle

Ultimate wheel

BC Wheel Rmbradburn 14:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)RMBradburn[reply]

Unicycling

Extreme unicycling

Mountain unicycling

Unicycle trials

Events

UNICON

People

Kaleigh Grainger

Kris Holm
And The Unicyclopedia
Might want to take a look at WP:TASKFORCE, which will tell you how to set up this idea as a sub-project of an existing project, which will both help you attract more participants and make starting up faster. -- Ned Scott 06:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, better a task force of WikiProject Cycling. --HybridBoy 11:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
University of Wisconsin System
Description

This project would help to improve the quality of articles that are a part of the University of Wisconsin System and its universities, such as University of Wisconsin-Madison, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and many others. There are currently 92 articles in the "Category:University of Wisconsin-Madison", and there are many other articles related to the other universities.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Lordmontu
Comments

Better a WikiProject University. --HybridBoy 11:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
User Integrity
Description

A WikiProject to make sure that all user accounts stay secure.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
mrholybrain's talk 02:09, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

•Lwarf• Talk! 11:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC) -- Like the idea, but the big question is the how?[reply]
Temporary Project Page

User:Mrholybrain/WikiProject User Integrity
Comments

One question: HOW? In principal, I like the idea, but I would like to know what procedures if any can be undertaken to achieve the goal. John Carter 14:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Same - this appears more a function for bureaucrats/meta admins than a wikiproject on en.wikipedia (as it affects *all* Wikimedia projects, not just ours) Orderinchaos 02:27, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Uttar Pradesh
Description

Uttar Pradesh is a state in India. This wikiproject will be a child project of WikiProject Indian states which in turn is a child project of WikiProject India. Projects for several other Indian states already exist.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Maquahuitl 14:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Better a task force in WikiProject India. --HybridBoy 11:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Given we're talking about a state with 9 times the population of my country and 90 times that of my main wikiproject stomping ground, I'd say as long as you've got the userbase and the commitment from them to develop and improve articles, go for it :) Orderinchaos 02:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weasels
Description

This wikiproject is to help the articles related to Ferrets, Weasels, and other animals inside the SuperFamily Musteloidea. This would be a much appreciated project by many wikipedians.
Interested Wikipedians
Teh Ferret 19:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC) Btw i only intended it to be for ferrets and weasels but i had to make it bigger for it to be project sized.[reply]

- hmwith talk 20:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC) (but I'm only in it for the ferrets!)[reply]

Drakelruler 20:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I started of with a ferret wikiproject but then decided to go into a much wider range and include all animals in the superfamily Musteloidea. Please help me in my search to improve all ferret and weasel articles on wikipedia.
John Carter 22:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC) - I like the idea, but think it would probably work best as a work group of Mammals. That way, there's less duplication (banners, assessment, etc.), and it might be easier to get collaborative efforts off the ground. John Carter 22:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Template Page: (working on it)

File:FerretDomestic123.PNG This article is within the scope of the Weasel WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to Ferrets, Weasels, and other Weasel like friends. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
A little template i made for the project.
Comments;
Consider making this a project of Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals. Chris 21:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How about making it wikiproject Carnivores and Wikiproject Herbivores, Wikiproject Insectivores and Wikiproject Omnivores? Teh Ferret 22:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what the "it" you're referring to is, there, I'm afraid. John Carter 22:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry english is my second language, I meant we could have new wikiprojects, take away the old Mammals wikiproject and divide it(the old wikiproject) into Carnivores Wikiproject, Herbavores Wikiproject, Insectivores wikiproject, And possibly an Omnivores Wikiproject.
No problem. Generally, though, given the existing pages, categories, and whatnot, it is all but impossible to split up an existing project into several different new projects. It can easily be done to create subprojects of the project for each of the four groups you suggested. Personally, though, given that the genetic and not dietic similarities of animals are generally the most "telling" and important, I think it might work best if they were divided along genus and family rather than diet. John Carter 19:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mustelidae is a family rather than a superfamily and it has an article. Given how specific this grouping is, it might work better as a subproject of a larger animal grouping. JeffStickney 03:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weezer
Description

Weezer is considered one of the most important and influential bands of recent times.^[who?] There is so much to be written about the band. I feel albums like Pinkerton (album) and Weezer (The Blue Album) have enough potential to be feature articles.

The Person who proposed it

User:wikiwonka12
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
M A Mason 00:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC) I can be quite busy most of the time but when I have a free moment I'd love to help in some way.[reply]

- hmwith talk 20:33, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
You might want to try this idea via task force. We've been trying to promote this idea as an alternative to starting a whole new WikiProject, as it still allows the focus of editing but a lot less hassle in starting up. -- Ned Scott 07:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, create only Task Force in a Band or Music WikiProject. --HybridBoy 11:26, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. The band has 5 (6?) albums and a limited number of singles, EPs and notable songs - better as a task force under WP Alternative Music. Orderinchaos 02:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
World charities
Description

I think that the question of global charity, non-profit, humanitarian organizations and everything connected with it (persons, biographies, types etc.) worth having the whole separate project in Wiki, as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory/History_and_society. The issue is notable and important. I am not so experienced to begin such project, but it would be nice and appropriate to do this by someone else.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Ans-mo 13:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rucha58 14:42, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
World Heritage Sites
Description

With over 800 sites currently designated a World Heritage Site by the UN, I think that it is time to create a Wikiproject on World Heritage Sites to better organize and improve articles that are related or on a World Heritage Site. -- _Hdt83 ^Chat 05:34, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
-- _Hdt83 ^Chat
Comments
World History
Description

The History of Human Beings from 11,000 C.E. to the Present day
Temporary Project Page

wikipedia:WikiProject World History
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Rucha58

--HybridBoy 11:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ans-mo 06:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Rucha58 20:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC): As I feel that the broad scope of World History has been overlooked by placing it within the Wikiproject History with only one article on the subject (History of the World), I propose making a new project: World History. Anybody who is interested in helping out or proposing ideas may contact me at Rucha58@tampabay.rr.com[reply]

52 Pickup 15:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC): Nice idea. If you get it up and running, it would be great if your project worked together with WP Former Countries.[reply]

Rucha58 21:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC): The Wikiproject World History talk page is now up and running.[reply]
WorldCat Identities - external links
Description

The recently prototyped WorldCat Identities provides pages - linked to the WorldCat union catalog - for 20 million 'identities', mainly authors and persons who are the subjects of published titles. This project would aim systematically to provide external links from biographical pages in Wikipedia to their WorldCat Identities page.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
[your name here]
Comments
Tim O'Reilly's reaction to WorldCat Identities was to call for a project like this: “I'd really love to see this tied in programmatically to wikipedia. There ought to be an automatic link to this site for every identity in wikipedia!” WorldCat Identities currently provides thousands of links in the reverse direction, i.e. to en:Wikipedia. Of the over 200,000 biographical articles on Wikipedia, around 20% are reliably automatically matchable to Wikipedia Identities via the Library of Congress Name Authority file (see User:Dsp13). Once WorldCat Identities is stabilized with 'cool' URLs, this project could proceed at full throttle: it would allow easy passage from Wikipedia biographical articles to associated library holdings. Dsp13 15:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How precisely would they be linked from Wikipedia articles? External links, special metadata templates like WP:PERSON, or what? --Gwern (contribs) 21:36 20 February 2007 (GMT)
I was envisaging external links, though that's not incompatible with an external link template like these. Dsp13 23:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure external links is the best solution. It runs afoul of some peoples sense of SPAM, it's a lot of work to create new entries, and there is no guarantee someone in the future won't just delete it - it won't be very consistent. I think the way Wikipedia handles ISBN's would be a better solution to finding library holdings. So long as an author has an ISBN listed, the user is directed to an internal Wikipedia page that lists 100s of sources for books. For example ISBN 0198114915 takes us to a page with WorldCat listed as the first entry. This seems like a cleaner, more consistent solution already in place. -- Stbalbach 15:12, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, ISBNs are excellent, and very clean. However, two points. First, ISBNs have only been assigned for recently published works. (For historical works, an OCLC number is emerging as a sort of stand-in.) Second, WorldCat Identities gathers together titles by/about a single individual: adding a single external link is certainly no more work than adding several ISBNs (though I see the two as complementary). You're right, though, that external links (especially if not backed by an external link template) run foul of some people's sense of spam. Dsp13 15:25, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't like them. The pages are nice enough, but they don't really show anything remarkable - certainly they don't seem to be expansive on the subject in the same way that linking to IMDB for films is. We should think very hard before rolling out a comprehensive project to link to a single external site across tens of thousands of pages - like it or not, it constitutes a pretty significant statement on our part as to the importance, usability and significance of their material.

The information on them is automatically generated, not cleaned up by human oversight, and it shows - the Kipling page tells us he wrote "Adventure fiction" and worked as a "Author, Bibliographic antecedent, Lyricist, Translator, Performer, Illustrator, Correspondent". (I am unaware of any notable levels of translating, performing or illustrating - plus what use is 'bibliographic antecedent' to a nonspecialist? - and he wrote a damn sight more than 'Kim'!) The major biography on him is apparently by "Frederick Winston Furneaux Smith Birkenhead", a name that only an authority catalogue could love. The cataloguing graph can't handle the fairly standard "19--" and has at least two or three completely wrong datapoints manual oversight would have caught, and the list of works is confusingly arranged and bizzarely constituted. (I am really not convinced the two named collections of poetry represent identifiably distinct groups of work... one being dated 1956 and "published between 1890 and 2006" seems dubious)

Really, there doesn't seem to be any major content on these external pages that we couldn't do better just writing into the article, and it doesn't serve as a gateway to anything much more than the holdings of a single self-selecting consortium of libraries (which is a lot less comprehensive than it can seem at first glance).

There is a use for these - their aggregate figures on the number of editions of different works is promising, and would be good to cite in passing for a lot of works - but I think we'd be doing our readers and editors a disservice to imagine that these are universally helpful external links. Shimgray | talk | 22:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To call WorldCat nothing 'much more than the holdings of a single self-selected consortium of libraries (which is a lot less comprehensive than it can seem at first glance)' seems entirely misleading to me: it's by far the biggest union catalog ever attempted, includes some major academic libraries and has over 1.1 billion holdings: just watch it grow. As far as your careful criticisms of a WorldCat Identities page goes, though, perhaps I was premature to make this project proposal while WorldCat Identities is such a recent beta project: several of these issues seem teething problems which I hope will get ironed out. What do others think? Dsp13 15:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps we need a "person" equivalent of this service for coordinates or this one of books? Andy Mabbett 01:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think that is exactly the way to go, and perhaps should piggy-back off the isbn project. --I think it would be confusing to add formal external links to any service, as most WPedians would not be able to tell this apart from spam, and would suggest all sorts of other possibilities, even such as automatic linking to myspace. Worldcat is a reasonable place for the ultimate resolution--as OpenWorldCat it is freely available, and essentially universal, at least in the US and to a lesser degree the English speaking world. But there are also quite a number of other author-name standardization projects: both Scopus and WebofScience are organizing proprietary ones, as are a number of repository -based and open source projects. DGG 02:05, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note that anything run by OCLC is not at all guaranteed to remain freely available; http://www.frbr.org/2007/05/10/xisbn-v2-pricing-discussions one of their most useful services] just went paid-access for any serious level of use. Shimgray | talk | 23:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever comes next, this will link to it. & I think it's already better for look-ups than the NUC;
we should figure out how to do a small-scale trials for linking.DGG 02:41, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Writers
Description

This proposed project would work to create, improve, and maintain articles dealing with writers of books and other print literature.
Interested Wikipedians (Please add your name)
John Carter 16:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--HybridBoy 11:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments

This a good general starting point for articles and task forces.--HybridBoy 11:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Team XBox
Description

Team XBox
I am proposing the formation of Team XBox. The purpose of this project is to correct, maintain, unify and make cohesive the coverage of Microsoft XBox products. This will include Services (XBox LIVE), Software, and Hardware (XBox, XBox 360)
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
[your name here]
Comments
Wikipedia:WikiProject Team XBox
Those interested please goto http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wageslave
Might want to check with WP:VG first. In the past console-specific projects usually fail. -- Ned Scott 03:18, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As there is a Nintendo and a Playstation Project, this would simply mirror those in scope and purpose. You can see both are listed project associated with WP:VG
Like I said, those projects are pretty much dead in the water. -- Ned Scott 07:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Zambia
Description

This wikiproject would be dedicating to finding and improving articles related to the country of Zambia as well as being a focus for like minded editors who work on articles about the country. The project would encompass all articles about Zambia including history, politics and the like. There are a lot of articles out there for Zambia and they are fairly halphhazardly edited by folks like me who have an interest. The wikiproject would give a little more focus to said editors. I'm putting feelers out to see if there would be any interest in this.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
--Lendorien 22:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sahmeditor 02:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Have you contacted Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa about the possibility of setting this up as a task force? John Carter 21:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, initially, create a Task Force (if this task force includes in a moment 10 or more Wikipeans, you coud create a WikiProject. --HybridBoy 11:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Zoo Tycoon
Description

Judging by the popularity and amount of content on the Zoo Tycoon series I beleive that a Zoo Tycoon Wikiproject should be brought up. We would prevent vandilism on the pages (which is suprisingly frequent) and of course improve and expand the arrticles currently.
For example, the page Zoo Tycoon 2: Extinct Animals is being vanalised almost once a week and, due to it being an upcoming game, various fand will edit in wishlists and predictions. The main Zoo Tycoon fansite and forum is currently down, both increasing the likelihood of wishlists and increasing checks on the article for latest news.

Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
--Cuddly Panda 10:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[Cuddly Panda][reply]
Comments
WikiProject 1990s
Description

The purpose of this project is to add or update articles that related to the decade. Such as music groups, television shows, movies, news/world events, etc.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
leemcd56

User:Hailey C. Shannon
Comments
I'm not really good at wording, so I'm gonna really need some help writing the project page. I'm sorry that I also have the project page already started. I guess I should have waited =(. Leemcd56 05:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Task forces/Work groups
There are advantages to proposing a new group as a task force of an existing project. Generally, task forces require fewer members to be effective and do not have the same degree of required project maintenance, as much of that is taken on by the parent project. If you would like to set up a new group specifically to function as a task force of another project, please list it below.
Global Perspectives Task force
Hi, forgive me if this is discussed somewhere in the archive or if an extant WikiProject covers my proposal, but: I'm wondering if a task force specifically concerned with making sure global perspectives are represented in key articles would be an efficient way to counter the systemic Western, 1st world bias the WikiProject Countering systemic biaslists among its concerns. As has often been noted, many articles have sections (e.g. "media response") that only describe U.S. events/reactions. I would be happy to spearhead an effort to make sure global perspectives are included where relevant. Any thoughts or advice regarding such a task force would be much appreciated. Keep up the great work!Benzocane 03:43, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great idea. We could call it Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias! -- TimNelson 03:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think the real job of this task force should be to provide international references for articles. Also to provide more in depth reactions of foreign countries when dealing with international crisises. I believe the Task force should be called Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Global perspectives task force. How does that ring.
--Random ^{Say it here!} 13:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We can use {{Globalize}} --HybridBoy 11:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Revert Checkers
Hello, there if the task is already covered by another task force then forgive me. As I was reverting vandalism today, I noticed that I made a mistake and reverted a good faith edit. Another editor, speedily undid my revert and restored the version. I then realized how easy it was to make a mistake while fixing vandalism, especially on a busy vandal fighting day. I have noticed that others also sometimes make mistakes of the same nature, and thought wouldn't it be a good idea to have a task force of WP:CVU, devoted to fixing reverting mistakes? Just a thought. --Tλε Rαnδоm Eδι τ оr 16:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 12:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
Great Idea but most of the time when I made that mistake there is someone there, it only happen 3 times to me,but still I'll give it a go.Arnon Chaffin (Talk) 12:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice proposal, but I don't think it's really necessary. With so many users monitoring recent changes, I think that users should just be on a lookout for incorrect reversions. And anyway, how would this project run? Where would the revert-checker start? Unless there were as many people on the project as there were watching recent changes, I don't think the project would work very well. Just my two cents... *Cremepuff 222* "As cool as grapes..." 17:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think an entire association is needed because, like Cremepuff222 said, a lot of users monitor recent changes and can even configure certain tools such as VandalFighter to filter edits with summaries that contain words or phrases such as "Reverted 2 edits...", "rv", "revert", or "vandalism". For these reasons, regular RC patrollers - such as those commenting - can take on the job. Thanks, « ANIMUM » 20:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]