Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Writing

Writing Project‑class

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Writing, a WikiProject interested in improving Wikipedia's coverage of content related to the fields of rhetoric, composition, technical communication, literacy, and language studies.WritingWikipedia:WikiProject WritingTemplate:WikiProject WritingWriting articles
Project	This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Welcome to the WikiProject Writing talk page![edit]

This page is a space to ask questions, coordinate collaborations, and discuss anything related to WikiProject Writing. You can learn more about using talk pages at Help:Talk pages. We are so glad you're here! Drkill (talk) 01:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Writing Edit-a-Thon[edit]

Hello WikiProject Writing! On June 5, I'll be co-leading a writing studies-focused edit-a-thon as part of the BRAWN (Boston Rhetoric and Writing Network) Summer Institute with my colleague rtbhive. We would love to use the project's open tasks list to inspire our attendants, but we don't want to step on any toes. What do you think? Also, if any of the WikiProject Writing members would like to join us, we'd love to have you along. Our session will be Saturday, June 5 from 12 to 1:30 Boston time. WritingTeacherC (talk) 18:18, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, WritingTeacherC! Yes, please feel free to use any of the resources here. And thanks for the invitation. Don't hesitate to reach out if WikiProject Writing or the CCCC Wikipedia Initiative can be of help. Drkill (talk) 20:21, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New page awaiting review[edit]

Hi all! I've created a page on Journal of Writing Research in my Sandbox. I published it and it is now waiting for review. As I'm not familiar with creating Wikipedia articles, I wonder if I now just have to wait? Do other participants to the WikProject Writing have access to it and can they review it? and how can I add it to the list with articles that are created (as now it's on the list of "articles in need of creation"). Looking forward to your feedback! thanks :) NV-umu (talk) 12:03, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

--> update: my article was declined (because of a lack of sources). I now created the article directly via the page that was already created by the WikiProject Writing Team (instead of creating a general page myself). Sorry for the confusion! I think the Journal of Writing Research article is in the right place :) Feedback is welcome! NV-umu (talk) 13:25, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NV-umu! Thanks for reaching out. I see that the Journal of Writing Research has been created in the right place. It looks like it could still benefit from a few more resources and some additional clean up of citations under the 'John R. Hayes' award section. I would recommend going through any mention of the journal published in the journal (statements from incoming and outgoing editors, conference chairs, etc.) to bolster the information you already have about the organization. Additionally, I would change the citations you have listed under the John R. Hayes award section to in-text citations, which will be generated under the 'References' section. I believe this will fix the issue of the banner for inappropriate use of external links. Please reach out if you have further questions! Breadyornot (talk) 21:56, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a great start, NV-umu. You might also be interested in WikiProject Academic Journals advice for writing articles about academic journals. Once you feel you've addressed the external link and citation issues you can remove the banner template yourself or ask here. Drkill (talk) 15:12, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the feedback Breadyornot and Drkill! I'll address the issues and will continue to contribute :) NV-umu (talk) 14:26, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Asao B. Inoue draft article[edit]

Hi all! I recently created a draft article for Asao B. Inoue. I would love your help in further developing it to include a research contributions section, as well as more clearly defining his teaching career. Any other contributions, suggestions, sources, or edits are welcomed. Thank you! Breadyornot (talk) 19:03, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Template talk:Infobox writer § Proposed short description[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Infobox writer § Proposed short description. Qwerfjkl talk 16:34, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback requested: New article on Min-Zhan Lu[edit]

Hi everyone! I have just created a new article on Min-Zhan Lu. I would love your feedback and contributions on the new article. A few areas I need help expanding are the addition of a research contributions section and expanding the selected publications section. A few wish list items I think would be nice are the addition of an infobox and standardizing the citations to shorthand. Thanks! Breadyornot (talk) 18:50, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback requested: New draft article on Morris Young[edit]

Hi there! I just created a draft article on Morris Young. I would love your feedback and contributions to get the article ready for the mainspace. I need help expanding his career and research section and more insight into his early life and education. If anyone has access to Dr. Young's book Minor Re/Visions: Asian American Literacy Narratives as a Rhetoric of Citizenship, I think this could help inform his early life and education section. Any contributions would be much appreciated. Breadyornot (talk) 21:22, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback requested: New draft article on Paula Carlino[edit]

Hello WikiProject Writing participants!

I just created a new draft article on Paula Carlino. It needs a lot more content and some review for cultural specificity; please help contribute/review if you can!

Thank you. 19:59, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Request for comment: Why is a subject matter expert not allowed to create an article on holistic scoring?[edit]

I am requesting a comment on a deleted draft of User:Rhhslv's sandbox for a new draft article on holistic scoring due to U5: Misuse of Wikipedia as a webhost. The article was deleted due to one citation Dr. Richard H. Haswell used of his own work.

How does this go against WP:SELFPUB and WP:SELFCITE? Specifically, self-citation is allowed on Wikipedia only when "produced by an established subject matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications" and the article "should not place undue emphasis on your work" (WP:SELFPUB, WP:SELFCITE). Would one citation of his work be considered self-promotion on a topic that he has widely published on by reliable publications and the work itself is critical to a comprehensive understanding of the topic? The article contributed to a more complete understanding of Holistic grading and contributes to the efforts of WikiProject Writing.

See talk page discussion on User:Bbb23's talk page for our prior discussion on the issue. We are requesting comment now to receive greater response and concensus on the issue.

I welcome comments from other WikiPorject Writing participants on this matter as well. Breadyornot (talk) 23:13, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Breadyornot: Please don't jump straight for RfC without exhausting the suggestions shown at WP:RFCBEFORE. This discussion may continue, just not as a full-blown thirty-day formal RfC. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:52, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Breadyornot, you are more likely to get useful comment if you provide a link to the page under discussion. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 19:52, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64: Thank you for the guidance!

@Pbsouthwood: Hi there, it is linked in the first sentence (the redlink for his sandbox). If you head to that page you will see the page is logged as previously deleted. I don't think I'm able to link previously deleted pages, but if there is, please do let me know! Breadyornot (talk) 20:32, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Breadyornot, Bbb23, Rhhslv The draft has a number of issues, including a lack of inline citations, but it is in a user sandbox, where perfection is not expected or required, and the assumption is that it is a work in progress. I do not agree that U5. Blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a web host is applicable in this case, and will restore the draft for development. It may be nominated for deletion in the standard way, but I would prefer to see the editor given some time to make improvements first. I suggest adding a few other references as a start, to eliminate the possible assumption of original research. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 05:28, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The draft now has 96 references, of which 4 are to a single source partly authored by the article creator. This is not at all overdoing WP:SELFCITE and does not conflict with WP:SELFPUB. I think we can reasonably consider this closed. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 14:54, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to repurpose the WWT shortcut[edit]

Currently, Wikipedia:WWT is a shortcut which redirects to the Writing project page. There is currently a discussion open to repurpose this shortcut to a different page; your feedback would be appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WWT. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 19:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Project-independent quality assessments[edit]

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) 22:41, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Argumentation theory#Requested move 23 August 2023[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Argumentation theory#Requested move 23 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —usernamekiran (talk) 15:22, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FAC of Communication[edit]

Hello, I wanted to let you know that I nominated the article Communication for featured article status. So far, there has not been much response from reviewers and I was wondering whether some of the editors here are inclined to have a look at it. If you have the time, I would appreciate your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Communication/archive1. For a short FAQ on the FA reviewing process, see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-04-07/Dispatches. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:11, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment page[edit]

Hello I just wanted to let you know that the table at Wikipedia:WikiProject Writing/Assessment is outdated as it states for example that Communication is a class C article, it doesn't have a link to an old diff/version so it points to the featured article class article that it is now. I think to fix this it should be enough to just remove the current Template:WikiProject Writing/Assessment and replace it with the more universal Template:Grading scheme. Wandering Morpheme 00:22, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Colin MacKay (journalist, born 1944)#Requested move 6 January 2024[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Colin MacKay (journalist, born 1944)#Requested move 6 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:40, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]