Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Bedfordshire
 | Bedfordshire NA‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
Flag[edit]
I am trying to find some reliable sources on the Bedfordshire flag. The only one so far I found is this news story of the flag being flown in 2010. [1] I can't find anything reliable on the flag's history or meaning. The flag also doesn't appear on the Flag Institute's registry of county and regional flags but I am not sure how reliable they are. Regardless I think this Wikiproject should change it's symbol from this flag to something else such as a picture of the county borders. Eopsid (talk) 14:45, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
This is my idea of what it should be changed to
Eopsid (talk) 14:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- The flag is an adaptation of the shield used in the Bedfordshire County Council coat of arms, which was devised in 1951 (see http://www.civicheraldry.co.uk/beds_74to09.html). The web page explains the meaning of the elements on the shield (and thus the flag), i.e. the wavy lines represent the River Ouse, the gold and red quarters come from the arms of the Beauchamps (noble family associated with the county), and the shells come from the arms of the Russells (Dukes of Bedford). Dubmill (talk) 15:28, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
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)
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)
A large amount of unsourced information (windmill, sacred shrine, etc) has been added to this, mostly by an editor who thought it funny to vandalise Mary Seacole, and who chose to invent 3 new civil parishes, declare a civil parish as a unitary authority, etc. Could someone with local knowledge and sources have a look? It was largely unsourced even before he started. PamD 07:56, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Portal[edit]
Hi.
Members of this WikiProject may be interested in the brand new Portal:Bedfordshire.
If you have any problems with it, I am happy to help.
JLJ001 (talk) 13:11, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
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.
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 10:54, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
A new newsletter directory is out![edit]
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)
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)
User script to detect unreliable sources[edit]
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.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Opening up assessment[edit]
Hey all,
Not sure if I can expect a response lol, but I'm planning to start work on some Bedfordshire-related articles, so I've reopened the WikiProject banner and thrown some categories together. If anyone would like to collaborate on revitalising the WikiProject, I for one am willing, but in the meantime thought I should at least have the courtesy to put a notice on the talk page. Frzzl talk · contribs 22:34, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Proposed county infobox template change[edit]
A discussion is ongoing at Template talk:Infobox English county#Proposal: remove the ethnicity section which is likely of interest to this project. The original proposal is for straight removal of the ethnicity field from the template; the population field would remain. This and a modified proposal would have the same effect on Bedfordshire. A result of the change, if consented to, is the restriction of demographics, other than population to the local authority administrative sections of the county infoboxes. It has no effect on editors placing reliably sourced statistics in the body of the article. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 01:05, 15 December 2023 (UTC)