| Revision as of 01:46, 27 May 2007 editRichard001 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers24,850 edits Move to broader scope?← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:11, 27 May 2007 edit undoNed Scott (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users39,901 edits →WikipediansNext edit → | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| :::I guess that's a bit of a grey area. I could see it go either way, but I'd learn towards those with significant involvement. -- ] 03:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | :::I guess that's a bit of a grey area. I could see it go either way, but I'd learn towards those with significant involvement. -- ] 03:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ::::Would rewording that line of the scope to "Articles on ]s who are notable for being involved with Misplaced Pages." work? That allows people like ] as well as some Wikipedian articles that are primarily about that person and their work with or some controversy on Misplaced Pages, while not including biography articles that have nothing to do with Misplaced Pages. — '''<font color="blue">]</font><font color="green">]</font>''' 12:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | ::::Would rewording that line of the scope to "Articles on ]s who are notable for being involved with Misplaced Pages." work? That allows people like ] as well as some Wikipedian articles that are primarily about that person and their work with or some controversy on Misplaced Pages, while not including biography articles that have nothing to do with Misplaced Pages. — '''<font color="blue">]</font><font color="green">]</font>''' 12:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :::::I think that hits the nail on the head. -- ] 02:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Scope== | ==Scope== | ||
Revision as of 02:11, 27 May 2007
Bot Tagging
Is it possible for someone to arrange a bot to put the WikiProject Misplaced Pages template on the larger Misplaced Pages subcategories that are still unhandled? This could save human time to set up an assessment page, agree on importance standards, and other setting up for the WikiProject. — Pious7 20:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- My bot can't do it; Go to WP:BOTREQ. ~EdBoy 21:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
- I manually tagged the remaining articles - it wasn't that much effort. There's now 100 articles in our scope. — Pious7 00:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedians
When I wrote the scope, I put that Wikipedians are in the scope of WikiProject Misplaced Pages. When I wrote that, however, I was more thinking about Category:Misplaced Pages people and did not know about all the articles in Category:Notable Wikipedians. When someone put the WikiProject Misplaced Pages banner on Talk:Tron Øgrim, I realized that there was over 180 other articles that might fit in this WikiProject. Would they fit under the scope of the WikiProject or should we be more specific in our scope to be more focused? If they do fit in this WikiProject, should we have a task force or something similar to cover Wikipedian articles in specific? — Pious7 00:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- I think it should be more focused. I bet we'd be surprised at how many people with articles also edit Misplaced Pages (far more than what is currently known), simply as something to do. Editing Misplaced Pages is just something these people did, and I doubt it's even mentioned in their articles. -- Ned Scott 00:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- Good point, but that raises another question. If it is part of the article, such as Tron Øgrim, should it be part of the WikiProject? Or must it be someone who works for Misplaced Pages like Jimmy Wales? — Pious7 03:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- I guess that's a bit of a grey area. I could see it go either way, but I'd learn towards those with significant involvement. -- Ned Scott 03:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- Would rewording that line of the scope to "Articles on Wikipedians who are notable for being involved with Misplaced Pages." work? That allows people like Jimmy Wales as well as some Wikipedian articles that are primarily about that person and their work with or some controversy on Misplaced Pages, while not including biography articles that have nothing to do with Misplaced Pages. — Pious7 12:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- I think that hits the nail on the head. -- Ned Scott 02:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- Would rewording that line of the scope to "Articles on Wikipedians who are notable for being involved with Misplaced Pages." work? That allows people like Jimmy Wales as well as some Wikipedian articles that are primarily about that person and their work with or some controversy on Misplaced Pages, while not including biography articles that have nothing to do with Misplaced Pages. — Pious7 12:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- I guess that's a bit of a grey area. I could see it go either way, but I'd learn towards those with significant involvement. -- Ned Scott 03:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
- Good point, but that raises another question. If it is part of the article, such as Tron Øgrim, should it be part of the WikiProject? Or must it be someone who works for Misplaced Pages like Jimmy Wales? — Pious7 03:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Scope
Since we do not have a project for the Wikimedia foundation as a whole, would it not be better to move this to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Wikimedia foundation so as to cover related topics like MediaWiki, Wikimedia Commons etc? I can't see the logic in creating a small project before a larger one exists, and broadening the scope wouldn't add that many more articles anyway, while preventing them from being orphaned. Richard001 01:46, 27 May 2007 (UTC)