Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indexes

Archives

WT:WPINDEXES
WT:WPINDICES

List of mathematics categories listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of mathematics categories to be moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/List of mathematics categories. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 15:59, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

List of Japanese actors listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of Japanese actors to be moved to List of Japanese male actors. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 05:15, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

List of American television series listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of American television series to be moved to List of American television programs. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 05:14, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

World War II

I have begun some tentative editing of lists at Category:Lists of World War II topics. In the lists, people are listed in alphabetical order by their first names, which almost always puts the link on the wrong page. I've come across several links which have no relationship to World War II.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 15:48, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Indexes

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod ^talk 16:13, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes it is valid to link to a disambiguation page in an index. For example, if all the articles are within the scope of the index. It is probably best in these cases to use the links with the (disambiguation) suffix, so that others know that it is intentional. Each of the disambiguated articles should also be in the index in its proper place. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 11:08, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you. — The Transhumanist 10:58, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commentary invited on Talk:List of slave owners

I have made a proposal on the talk page for this list which I'd like to invite comment on. There is presently little activity on the talk page. Pinkbeast (talk) 09:39, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User script to detect unreliable sources

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:51, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Red links

I have noticed that some Indexes of Wikipedia articles contain red links to articles that do not exist! (eg Index of aviation articles.) This seems totally bizarre. Red links are explicitly deprecated in "See also" sub-headings (see WP:NOTSEEALSO.)

Is there an established position on the status of red links in Lists and Indexes? If so, where can I read what it says? Dolphin (t) 05:25, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]