Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Atlantic Coast Conference

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconAtlantic Coast Conference NA‑class (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Atlantic Coast Conference, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Atlantic Coast ConferenceWikipedia:WikiProject Atlantic Coast ConferenceTemplate:WikiProject Atlantic Coast ConferenceAtlantic Coast Conference articles
NAThis article has been rated as NA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Wikipedia Day Awards[edit]

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 19:20, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ACC Basketball Tournaments[edit]

I found a good source to fill in all the blanks on the ACC tourney articles: http://www.sportsstats.com/ACC/standings/index.html Take a look. Wrad 16:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rating[edit]

Could someone from the Wiki Project ACC Rate the Florida State Academic site as well as our athletic site. I have been working hard as may others have and would like to know what you all think. thank you UkrNole 485 01:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ACC Baseball and Clemson Men's Basketball[edit]

Hey yall, this summer I worked with WikiProject College Baseball and spent a lot of time creating baseball tournament pages for the ACC, here's what's been done so far:

Also, I have been working on the Clemson Tigers men's basketball page recently. So yall can check that off of the list of pages to create. Jober14 (talk) 01:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duke University FAR[edit]

Duke University has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. 152.2.128.80 (talk) 00:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Atlantic Coast Conference football championship games Featured Topic under 6-month retention[edit]

Hi, Following a rule change, Atlantic Coast Conference football championship games now fails featured topic criteria 1.d. and 3.c., as 2008 ACC Championship Game needs to be audited for quality and added to the topic. The topic has 6 months from the time of the rule change, or until 2009-01-03, to re-meet the criterion - rst20xx (talk) 00:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good to me. How about you audit it? Wrad (talk) 00:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please respond below me rather than editing out my post and changing yours. It's kind of a no-no to edit other people's posts. Thanks. Wrad (talk) 04:04, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh oops, apologies, I did that by accident and didn't realise. Well anyway, I don't think I have the knowledge of the MOS or subject to give it a proper peer review, sorry - rst20xx (talk) 14:54, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Input requested on Maryland Terrapins dispute[edit]

A third opinion request was posted for a dispute about whether or not information and press coverage of fan behavior should be included in the Maryland Terrapins article, which is tagged on Talk:Maryland Terrapins as within the scope of this project. See:

Is there a project consensus about this sort of thing in ACC sports team articles in general? If so, could one or more of you post it over there? Thank you. — Athaenara ✉ 05:41, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

College fight songs[edit]

There is a thread on the administrators' noticeboard which may concern editors involved in this WikiProject that will affect all of the articles in the Category:ACC fight songs. Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Lyrics. CrazyPaco (talk) 01:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia Institute of Technology GA Sweeps: On Hold[edit]

I have reviewed Georgia Institute of Technology for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 20:33, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment of Florida State University[edit]

I have done a GA Reassessment of the Florida State University article as part of the GA Sweeps project. My review is here. It is my opinion that the article does not meet the current GA Criteria. There are several dead links, areas of the article that need to be referenced, and a general tone to the article that does not appear neutral. I have placed the article on hold for a week and I am notifying all interested projects and editors. Please contact me on my talk page should you have questions. H1nkles (talk) 21:48, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP 1.0 bot announcement[edit]

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Need peer reviews![edit]

...for Atlantic Coast Conference Men's Basketball Coach of the Year so that it can become a featured list. All input is appreciated. Thanks! Jrcla2 (talk) 23:54, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ACC articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release[edit]

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the ACC articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 00:03, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FAR notice[edit]

I have nominated Duke University for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dana boomer (talk) 21:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on consolidating inactive and semi-active university WikiProjects[edit]

This project may be affected by a proposed consolidation of inactive and semi-active WikiProjects covering universities. The proposed consolidation is being discussed on the talk page of WikiProject Universities. We are seeking feedback from the projects that may be impacted before we decide on a course of action. Please drop by to participate in the discussion. Thanks! –Mabeenot (talk) 06:59, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Standardizing assessment of articles by importance[edit]

Hi everyone,

Right now it seems like articles that fall within the scope of this Wikiproject have no consistence in how they are assessed for importance when placing the project's banner on the article's talk page. (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Atlantic Coast Conference/Assessment)

For instance, Duke University & Boston College are listed as "Top" importance; Clemson University and Clemson Tigers as "High" importance, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill at "Mid" importance.

I'm thinking articles on the institutions and athletic programs should be "Top" or "High", articles on individual football, basketball and baseball programs "High" or "Mid" (eg. one step down from the parent articles). Thoughts? CrazyPaco (talk) 09:49, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, football and basketball venues and current coaches might even deserve a "High", as well, though I could see reasoning behind "Mid" ratings. Kithira (talk) 15:36, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The only obviously Top articles are on the conference itself: like Atlantic Coast Conference. Should top just be articles on the conference (like championships and commissioners) or do you think institutions and athletic programs should to there too? Below is just some examples of trying to separate articles by drilling down from "parent articles" to components or daughters of those articles.
Eg.
Top: Atlantic Coast Conference, John Swofford, Jim Weaver, ACC Championship Game, ACC Men's Basketball Tournament
High: Boston College, Boston College Eagles, Duke University, Duke Blue Devils, etc
Mid: Boston College Eagles men's basketball, Boston College football, Boston College Eagles baseball, etc
Low: Alumni Stadium, Conte Forum, Shea Field, etc
Perhaps that is too spread out and we need to bump things up.
There are a lot of list articles, like ACC Athlete of the Year, Atlantic Coast Conference men's basketball, Atlantic Coast Conference Men's Basketball Player of the Year, etc; where I'm not sure where they'd fit.
Where do current or past coaches fit into a scheme like this? Where does a Dean Smith or Bobby Bowden fit in? Coaches of the year and Players of the year, where do they fit vs less decorated current or past coaches? CrazyPaco (talk) 18:14, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Opinions sought for navbox design[edit]

I am seeking opinions on creating the best navigation box for the topic of Pittsburgh Panthers football at Template talk:Pittsburgh Panthers football navbox#Navbox contents. Three possible examples are provided in addition to the current version. Any comments and additional suggestions would be appreciated. CrazyPaco (talk) 17:38, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ACC worldmark trademark issue[edit]

A recent edit was made swapping in the registered trademarked ® ACC wordmark for banners of the wikiproject. Traditionally on Wikipedia, it has been frowned upon to used trademarks as banners and icons when not critically discussing them or within infoboxes. Previously this project used an italicized Arial as a close approximation suggestive of the trademark but not a full image file rendition of the trademark. See Wikipedia:Logos#Trademark concerns and MOS:LOGO for additional information.

Thoughts on appropriate use of ACC  (<font face="Arial"><u>'''''<font color="#004984">ACC</font>'''''</u> </font>) versus (File:Atlantic Coast Conference wordmark.svg) ? CrazyPaco (talk) 18:33, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Softball project notice[edit]

Hello, everyone. I've recently started the College softball task force, working to help expand Wikipedia's college softball coverage. I thought I'd post a notice around at some of the other college sports projects to give everyone a heads up. If you have an interest in the sport, please consider visiting the project. Thanks, Ejgreen77 (talk) 08:04, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template Deletion discussion notice[edit]

A template deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 August 15#College sports retired numbers regarding retired college jersey navboxes and categories may be of interest to ACC Wikiproject members. CrazyPaco (talk) 08:33, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

College basketball team navboxes[edit]

Please join discussion at the College Basketball Wikiproject for forming a consensus on the creation of a basic navbox for college basketball teams. CrazyPaco (talk) 05:54, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Leaflet for Wikiproject Atlantic Coast Conference at Wikimania 2014[edit]

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 13:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal[edit]

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Featured Article discussion related to this project[edit]

The 2008 ACC Championship Game was a college football game between the Virginia Tech Hokies and the Boston College Eagles.

I've nominated 2008 ACC Championship Game for consideration as Today's Featured Article, see discussion at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/2008 ACC Championship Game. — Cirt (talk) 21:16, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject X is live![edit]

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject[edit]

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[edit]

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   07:26, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool[edit]

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User script to detect unreliable sources[edit]

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

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

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) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Atlantic_Coast_Conference&oldid=1144479743"