Wikipedia talk:WikiProject North America/Archive 1

Archive 1

Welcome

Welcome all, WikiProject North America has been started.

A few things are left to create, such as the categories listed in the hierarchy at:

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/WikiProject North America

and the invitation template:

• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Wikipedia:WikiProject North America/Invite

and anything I forgot to request.

76.66.199.238 (talk) 08:52, 24 October 2010 (UTC) (the original proposer, from June)

It's five in the morning where I'm at and I've been working through the wee hours of the night on this. Do me a favor and create the invite message yourself, in my talk page or at AfC, and I'll make sure it gets put up when I wake up today/tommorow (in about eight hours). I'll do the other thing then too, if it isn't already done by then. Sven Manguard _Talk 08:56, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

• Our main images
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

76.66.203.138 (talk) 09:44, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

• Related main images
• 
• 
• 
• 

76.66.203.138 (talk) 13:05, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Stub types

There is currently no main Category:North America stubs or Category:North American stubs, and most North American stub templates have the form {{NorthAm-xyz-stub}}. So I am looking at what's needed to as WP:Stub sorting for a {{NorthAm-stub}} and related category. They ask for 30 pages that would be served with this stub type before creating it. 76.66.199.238 (talk) 10:21, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Over at WP:East Asia, they boldly created their stub category and stub type. Perhaps someone here should do that? {{North-America-stub}}/{{North-American-stub}} & Category:North America stubs ... 76.66.203.138 (talk) 09:26, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Tags

Ok, North America is tagged as Top-importance; I plan to do the same to USA/Canada/Mexico/Greenland, that being the core area stated in the Wikiproject proposal. Then we'll have to filter through the various "xyz of North America" articles (ie. History of North America) and tag them with varying importances. 76.66.199.238 (talk) 14:18, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Well I got the US, Mexico, and Greenland, the IP already got Canada. I also put as 'high' importance NAFTA. I'm going to take a break and deal with off-Wiki responsibilities, but I'll look around tonight for other things to tag. BTW, the class categories are done, except for Redirect and Book, which I can't make until they are enabled elsewhere, they just aren't working right now. Sven Manguard _Talk 20:48, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh, crap, I'll have to look up that in the class template. 76.66.196.13 (talk) 06:17, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I put in a request at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Template:Wikiproject North America/class to fix that. 76.66.196.13 (talk) 07:05, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Just to help people with what might need tagging:

• Special:Search/intitle:of North America
• Special:Search/intitle:North American

will bring up likely candidates, though entities named "...North America(n)..." should not be tagged, unless they represent a territory of roughly that of North America or Can-Am. Even then, a concert tour of North America, probably shouldn't be tagged, and if it is, it would only be accorded Bottom-importance in most cases. 76.66.196.13 (talk) 07:44, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I want to join

Hello I saw this project in the Mexico article talk and I want to join. How can I be a member of this project? Do I only have to register and that's it? Thanks. Tlakuache (talk) 05:36, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Just add your signature to the sign-up sheet, and it'd be nice if you watchlisted this talk page as well; atleast check in regularly to discuss issues that come up, and help with collaborations, and tagging articles. 76.66.196.13 (talk) 06:15, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

If we decide to create a barnstar for this WikiProject, it might be usefully located at {{Wikipedia:WikiProject North America/Barnstar}}

76.66.196.13 (talk) 10:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

We have two possible images for use on the barnstar, any opinions?

• 
  The WikiProject Image File:WikiProject North America.svg
• 
  The Star Image File:WikiProject North America Barnstar.png
• 
  Barnstar WikiProject North America File:Barnstar WP North America.svg

76.66.203.138 (talk) 09:31, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Note the star image contains areas beyond the Wikiproject's current scope (Central America, Caribbean); 76.66.203.138 (talk) 09:46, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, well I just took the SVG globe and put it into star shape. I don't possess the skill to make or edit SVGs, (I really don't have the time to learn Inkscape right now.) Honestly, I'm not too sure about the ring cutting Canada clean in half in the SVG Alex made, it's an interesting visual, but I think it might be a tad unprofessional. That being said, it's an improvement over the old globe because it's more accurate to our scope.

On the matter of the barnstar, before we change it, I think we should make a version of Alex's image that is star shaped. Again, this is something I can't do, but Alex does good work, so if he is willing to spend the time, I'll trust his work. Sven Manguard _Talk 20:07, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Alex already changed it, when he implemented the new image across our WPP templates. I noticed that almost all barnstar images are stars, while ours currently isn't. The image used would also depend on if it is only awarded on issues dealing with the WikiProject area or would it include "Greater North America" as well (Caribbean, Central America, mostly) 76.66.203.138 (talk) 04:36, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

We could just put the entire SVG in a star (i.e. Alex would draw a star outline that enclosed the globe image,) name it something different from the origional, and use the globe-in-a-star as our banrstar and the globe not in a star for everything else. Sven Manguard _Talk 05:28, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Just thought of this. What if, for the star, we lose the light blue orbit, and change the light blue circle border into a rounded star shaped border. It would be a 'theme' for the project. Sven Manguard _Talk 05:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I think the award clearly indicates that it is a barnstar of the WikiProject North America, not that of the North America Portal, which follows the continental definition of North America. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Talk? )} 06:06, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I just designed a barnstar. It seems that for WikiProject awards, a star-shaped image is more appropiate. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Talk? )} 06:03, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I LOVE IT! This is exactly what I was thinking of. You do great work Alex. Sven Manguard _Talk 07:37, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad you liked it, I followed the design your asked for. Cheers. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Talk? )} 07:59, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks good. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 08:00, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Greenland

Why does Greenland come under this WP? It is part of Europe, not North America. Mjroots (talk) 17:20, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, maybe not according to the Europe article. However, in the UK, letters sent via Royal Mail to Greenland go at Europe rates, not Zone 1 rates - confusing, ain't it? Mjroots (talk) 17:22, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Greenland is on the North American plate, the closest land next to Greenland is a Canadian arctic island, separated by a small strait. Iceland is many times further away, and Iceland isn't really part of Europe either, it's a hotspot island in the middle of the Atlantic, not part of Europe or North America geologically or geographically (politically and ethnically it is part of Europe). Greenland itself was split from North America by the creation of the Labrador Seaway in the Mesozoic era, after North America had already rifted from Europe. Greenland's native inhabitants are Inuit, which is a North American native group. Greenland has a NORAD base on it. It is only part of "Europe" in that a European country rules it. But then so are several Caribbean islands, and French Guiana. 76.66.196.13 (talk) 03:59, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... does the Royal Mail also give European rates to other non-European holdings of European countries? (such as St.Pierre-et-Miquelon, French Guyana) 76.66.196.13 (talk) 04:13, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Rating Article Importance

Hello there. As we are at the beginning of this project, it is time to set some guidelines for assessment. Please state your ideas below.

Once we have a rough idea of what

Statement by Sven Manguard

• Top Importance:

• The countries that are part of North America, as well as "North America."
• Nothing else.

• High Importance:

• International treaties between the countries in North America (such as NAFTA).
• Wars between countries within North America (such as the Mexican–American War).
• Key historical entities located within North America (such as the Aztecs).
• Regional transnational geographical bodies (such as the Gulf of Mexico).

• Mid Importance:

• "Relationship" articles between the countries of North America (such as Canada–Mexico relations)
• Contemporary issues in regional transnational relations (such as Mexico – United States barrier)

• Low Importance:

• People. (I'm not sure who qualifies for this. Maybe Christopher Columbus and Amerigo Vespucci?)

• Bottom Importance:

• I do not believe this should be used.

Clearly this does not cover everything, and some things will just scream that they need to be on a higher or lower level (of course, common sense trumps all,) but I think this makes sense. I'm interested in hearing everyone else's feedback.

Users who endorse this summary

1. - As poster. Sven Manguard _Talk 03:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
2. 76.66.196.13 (talk) 04:05, 26 October 2010 (UTC) — generally supporting.

Statement by 76.66.196.13 (talk)

I also think that History of North America, Geography of North America would rate as top-importance. I would rate the paeleogeological articles about large blocks of North America as mid-importance (such as the North American Continental Seaway), separate from the modern geographical articles as stated here for high-importance.

Users who endorse this summary

1. 76.66.196.13 (talk) 04:05, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
2. Agree with both points. Sven Manguard _Talk 04:13, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Statement 2 by 76.66.196.13 (talk)

Addendum: I also think that bottom-importance should be available for articles which are transactionally North American, but of no importance to the understanding of North America, which however require watching for geographic bias or fixing of geographic bias. This also allows our banner's attention switch to tell us when geographic balancing is needed for an article.

It may be that bottom importance is only used temporarily whenever a North American article with geographic bias needs balancing, where an editor will place our banner on the talk page with (WP...|class=whatever|importance=bottom|attention=yes) and that we remove it afterwards...

Alternately we could leave it there after we fix the issue, and just remove the attention flag, leaving the article as low importance.

This would allow articles to not be flagged as unrated importance, or filling our NA category, while still appearing in the attention category.

76.66.196.13 (talk) 08:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Users who endorse this summary

• 76.66.196.13 (talk) 08:45, 26 October 2010 (UTC) as proposer. -- My IP-rotated this morning. Seems to have been a service outage, so Alex, if you're tracking me, I'm 76.66.203.138 (talk) 08:50, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments

• Comment - Knowing your history of bias towards Mexico (that Mexico is part of Central America instead of North America, or pushing the use of the obscure term "Middle America" just to group it with other countries instead of US and Canada) as the former user "Corticopia" and your multiple vandalic edits as anonymous IP, well I clearly see why you proposed this. You want to call "geographic bias" whatever doesn't suit your POV, more directly the categorization of Mexico as a CA country. So I reject this. I'm just expecting to discover what "users" are really you, it is so obvious you created all this to follow your agenda. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Talk? )} 10:17, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Excuse me, what are you talking about? I proposed this project because Greenland and Mexico are part of North America. And there was no WikiProject covering North America, which could deal with cross-border issues, or pre-establishment issues (before the modern countries of USA, Canada, Mexico, Greenland were created). As for geographic bias, I find that many articles on Wikipedia are unbalanced when they are representing a North America wide topic, having a lack of content from regions outside where the main contributors are from. Usually this means alot of US content and little or no content from Mexico or Canada. As for this particular usage of Bottom-importance, it is more for something like the North American Scrabble championships. Why do you think I am this Corticopia (talk · contribs) ? Are there no other users from Canada? 76.66.196.13 (talk) 11:02, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I had no idea any of this was going on before this project started, and I'm not sure this is the same person you had issues with in the past.Using the IP 76.66.199.238, which was this user's IP when he proposed the Wikiproject, I geolocated the IP to Motreal. It is part of a large network from a rotating address ISP (hence why his IP address keeps changing on us.) It may be the same person, it may not be, but this is the first time I've heard anyone ever say Mexico wasn't physically part of North America. That seems a tad absurd. Culturally, Mexico is part of the transcontinental Latin America (i.e. Spanish or Portuguese Speaking former colonies that share a few key cultural constants, which I'm not going to try to elaborate on because it isn't my area of expertise.) Either way, Mexico is clearly within the scope of WikiProject North America.

As to the proposal itself, I really didn't understand it until the IP responded to the comment by AlexCovarrubias. Now that I see what he is saying, I can partially get behind it. I would use the bottom level for anything that is located within North America/centered in North America, and involves two or more nations within North America, but isn't important to the understanding of North America, such as the IP's example of the North American Scrabble Championships, and I would tag it permanently, rather than temporarily. The corollary to that is that I would advise against using the attention needed tag for such things. That tag should be reserved for only a tiny number of pages and under special circumstances, such as articles that were FA/A/GA and are being/have just been downgraded, and B articles that we as a group have targeted for GA promotion. Generally, the attention needed tag is for the most important items needing work within a project, not for articles needing general balancing or copy editing. That's just my opinion though. Sven Manguard _Talk 14:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Statement by

Users who endorse this summary

Shortcuts

Anyone given any thoughts to the usefulness of having a shortcut to our project? And what those shortcuts might be? 76.66.203.138 (talk) 08:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Topic index

I noticed that we don't have a topic index for North America, though we may not need one, as topic indices seem to be disappearing from Wikipedia. Index of North American topics or Index of North America-related topics.

76.66.203.138 (talk) 08:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

User:LivingBot/ProjectSignup

Do we wish to sign up for this? It's an automated announcement routine to WP:Announcements based on our milestones.

76.66.203.138 (talk) 13:23, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't see why not. Publicity is good. Sven Manguard _Talk 15:58, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I've submitted an application to sign-up, - milestones are 10,20,30... GA/A/FA articles; 500,1000,1500... total articles. You might want to adjust the scaling for total articles. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 06:14, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Signpost

We were in the Wikipedia Signpost for 25 October 2010. Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-10-25/WikiProject_report

76.66.203.138 (talk) 05:46, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 20:39, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've added those links to the project page. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 07:56, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject North America.svg

Thanks for the new image, Alex. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 08:01, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

List of last surviving war veterans of Mexico

We have a request to create List of last surviving war veterans of Mexico at Last North American veterans by war. The request came about from the recent merge request between List of last surviving Canadian war veterans and Last surviving United States war veterans. Unfortunately, no such list currently exists for Mexico, Greenland, or any other North American locality, except USA and Canada.

76.66.203.138 (talk) 08:09, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion to rename assessment categories for this project

Greeting WikiProject North America, it was noticed recently that of approximately 1660 WikiProjects yours was one of 11 that preceed the assessment categories with WikiProject. All the rest state only the subject (ex. North America vice WikiProject North America). In an effort to standardize the assessment categories and make it easier to identify the scope of articles we would like to change the assessment categories of your project from WikiProject North America to simply North America to be in-line with all the others. Before doing this we would like your input on this change to ensure that it meets the consensus of your project. --Kumioko (talk) 17:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I was wondering about that. I set up almost all of the pages in the initial creation of this WikiProject, which was created through WP:AFC. The pages in line to be created were presented as a very long list, which I assumed was generated semi-automatically at some point in the process. The person who can tell you where the list of pages I was working from came from is an IP from the 76.66.xxx.xxx range, last seen as 76.66.203.138. He was the one who brought the whole package to AfC. If the change is going to bring us into the standardization, I don't see why we would not do it. I'd say that you should go ahead. Clearly you know what is going on better than I do in this area. Just make sure everything is moved instead of recreated so that we don't confuse the AfC helperbot, EarwigBot, who tracks all the successful AfCs, and so that we preserve the history of the pages themselves. I had to manually override the destinations for several of the links to make everything work properly, so moving instead of recreating will save the trouble of manually fixing all of those as well. Sven Manguard _Talk 19:36, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Well... I remembered an old consensus discussion from about 5-6 years ago that established that WikiProject categories should be named with "WikiProject" in their names to avoid confusion with article or other heirarchies. Was there a new consensus discussion that overrode that? The thing is with this project "North America" is different depending on what definition is used. If someone is navigating looking through assessed categorizations as if the names actually meant what they appear to mean, it might be confusing, depending on their definition of North America. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 09:32, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

assessment summaries

Ok, so I found the assessment summaries box, from WP:1.0 (not at the spot where the instructions say it would be), and have placed it on our page.

All that's left is figuring out how the NewArtBot config works. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 09:26, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Bermuda

Hey people, what about Bermuda?, I know that Bermuda is usually related to the Caribbean , but the islands should be included here like Greenland and Saint Pierre and Miquelon are. Thoughts? cheers.--Jcmenal (talk) 19:58, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Greenland was part of the scope described when the project was proposed, and is part of this WikiProject. See the section above, #Greenland. St-Pierre is also covered under the original proposal. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 08:26, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

As for Bermuda... that wasn't determined at the time of creation. We could ask WPBERMUDA, or have a poll here. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 08:26, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Nothing says we can't overlap with other projects. Also, North America has multiple definitions, and I don't see why the project has to choose one of them. I see no problem with including Bermuda. Sven Manguard _Talk 05:30, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Last North American veterans by war listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Last North American veterans by war. Since you had some involvement with the Last North American veterans by war redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). 76.66.194.212 (talk) 06:55, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Fort Hancock Texas, Military Post of

Fort Hancock was established as a new site for the older Camp Rice near the lower El Paso San Antonio road June 9, 1882. At first it was a temporary camp of tents occupied by one troop of the 10th Cavalry "Buffalo Soldiers". It was the last Post built in texas meant to help control Indian depredations, however by that time the Indian Wars were over in Texas. Revolutionary and bandit activities along the Mexican Border were still a concern. Patrols operated from the post to watch the border.The post was renamed Fort Hancock in 1886 for Major General Winfield Scott Hancock, a hero of the Battle of Gettysburg and unsuccessful Presidential candidate in 1884. The post was heavily damaged in a flood of the Rio Grande the same year. It was rebuilt and attempts were made for flood control to prevent future flooding. Fort Hancock was never a large post, rarely having more than sixty men assigned. At times there were mixed detatchments of Infantry and Cavalry.During the late 1880's Company H 5th Infantry was stationed there. The post was again severely damaged in a flood in 1894. It was not rebuilt and was abandoned on December 15, 1895. Intermittent activity at the site of the post during the Mexican Border Period 1911-1920 has been evidenced by artifacts found at the site, but the main post during this period was near the railroad station that served the community of Fort Hancock about one mile away. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.248.235.1 (talk) 21:12, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Is there a question in here somewhere? --Kumioko (talk) 21:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Featured portal candidate: United States

Portal:United States is a current featured portal candidate. Please feel free to leave comments. -- RichardF (talk) 05:57, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Adding "Popular pages" to U.S.-related projects

A very interesting tool of the Wikimedia Toolserver is called WikiProject Popular pages lists. These lists are similar to project-related article lists like U. S. article lists used for generating assessment statistics. The Popular pages lists include the rank, total views, average daily views, quality and importance ratings for the listed articles. Here is the full list of projects using popular pages lists. An FAQ also is available at User:Mr.Z-man/Popular pages FAQ.

I recently added links to lists of popular pages as shown below to the U.S. Portal - WikiProjects box and the nominations sections for each of the selected articles boxes.

---

Portal:United States/Projects/Popular pages

---

Because the North America project was not included in the Borders section, I am bringing up the popular pages tool here. This tool makes it very easy to track three of four balancing dimensions when selecting articles for showcasing at a portal - quality, importance and popularity. When tracking the fourth dimension, topic, the related article lists tool (such as for U.S. article lists tool) also might be useful by filtering on categories of interest.

If you do decide to use this tool, feel free to update Portal:United States/Projects/Popular pages as well.

Regards, RichardF (talk) 03:12, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Featured portal candidate: United States

Portal:United States is a current featured portal candidate. Please feel free to leave comments. -- RichardF (talk) 03:12, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Discussion Invitation

Discussions of interest to WikiProject North America is currently going on at Talk:Americas#City_proper POV and Talk:North America#Country Grouping/Mexico are currently going on. You are invited to participate. 08OceanBeach^S.D. 06:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Project Scope?

User AlexCovarrubias recently pointed out to be that this projects scope only includes the United States, Canada, Greenland, and Mexico. I'm simply inquiring to see if this is true or not? It wouldn't make sense if it was as the article this project links to is covers the whole North American continent. 08OceanBeach^S.D. 07:13, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

This is just ridiculous... your answer is there in the project main page. There's a Portal North America that encompasses the whole continent. There are WikiProjects for Central America and for the Caribbean. This one was created for North America only. Read. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Talk? )} 07:17, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

As far as I am aware this covers North America as a continent as a whole. The Central America and Caribbean projects are just projects of a smaller region of the whole. It would be rediculously silly to call this project Wikiproject North America if its not covering what is North America. It would cause confusion. Clearly this project is for the whole continent and if its not worded that way on the main page it should be. -DJSasso (talk) 13:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

When this project was created we saw that the other countries of North America (continent) already had WikiProjects of their own specific regions, such as WikiProject Central America and WikiProject Caribbean. So only the countries listed in this page were selected to create a new WikiProject that we called North America, because they are usually grouped under this term but as a region. In simple words, all of the other countries had already a WikiProject grouping them in their correspondent regions. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Talk? )} 18:54, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree with DJSasso. This project should cover the whole continent, as that is the most common usage for the word North America; and as has been shown, to not do so otherwise causes confusion. It is very common for there to be an all encompassing WikiProject. For instance. Wikipedia:WikiProject United States covers all of the WikiProjects of the 50 States. 08OceanBeach^S.D. 20:09, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

"American Indians"

See Talk:Native Americans in the United States where it is to be renamed to a term that uses "American Indian" without any mention of the United States. As "American Indian" has been used to describe aboriginal peoples of North America in the past, outside of the United States, as well as inside, this might be of interest to you. 65.93.15.213 (talk) 05:29, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiWomen's History Month

Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:North America will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in North America's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 23:37, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

United States GAR

An article that you have been involved in editing, United States has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the good article reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Cambalachero (talk) 18:28, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Just Published! Could someone rate this?

Hello,

I just published an article I've been working on for a week or so, Princess Theatre, Edmonton. I believe it's in the scope of your project. Would anyone be able to go over there and rate it for me?

--Rawlangs (talk) 06:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

RfC regarding the official language of Mexico

I have started an RfC regarding the question of whether Spanish should be mentioned as an official language in the infobox recognizing its de facto official status in spite of the fact that it is not legally given that status in Mexican law which simply mentions it as a National language along with the indigenous languages, and does not specify an official status. Please give your input. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:57, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Portal:Geography at portal peer review

Portal:Geography is now up for portal peer review, the review page is at Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Geography/archive1. I've put a bit of effort into this as part of a featured portal drive related to portals linked from the top-right corner of the Main Page, and feedback would be appreciated prior to featured portal candidacy. Thank you for your time, — Cirt (talk) 21:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Portal:Geography for featured portal consideration

• Geography

I've nominated Portal:Geography for featured portal candidacy, discussion is at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Geography. Thank you for your time, — Cirt (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

"America"

The usage of "America" is up for discussion, see talk:America -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:05, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Call for organizers: WLM US 2013 needs you

Hi, I wanted to invite you to help organize the 2013 Wiki Loves Monuments photo contest in the United States. Last year, over 22,000 files were uploaded (90% by new Wikipedia users) to illustrate articles about historic places in the United States. We need all the help we can get, so if you're interested in organizing the contest, please add your username at this page. If you have any questions, please don't post them here - place a new message on User talk:Mono. Thanks, Mono 15:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

{{Organization of American States}}

Template:Organization of American States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 01:45, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Americas

FYI, there's a proposal to create a western hemisphere coordinating project above NA/SA/etc. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Americas -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:45, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_November_15#Category:Northern America

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_November_15#Category:Northern America. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 00:39, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

"Draft" rating

I suggest that this wikiproject implement the new "Draft"-class and categorize into Category: Draft-Class WikiProject North America articles‎, for pages in the WP:Drafts namespace that was recently initiated. This would allow tracking of articles related to this wikiproject that are in draft form, which members of this wikiproject may wish to improve and move into the mainspace. -- 76.65.128.112 (talk) 23:34, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

CfD discussion for societies and cultures

There is a discussion going on right now at WP:Categories for discussion that involves changing the category names for all cultures, from, for example, "Afghan society" to "Society of Afghanistan". I can see that next will be changing "German culture" to "Culture of Germany" and the like. This would be for all ethnicities, nationalities and cultures.
If you would like to weigh in, the conversation is occurring at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Society by country. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:26, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2014

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and its sister projects. The campaign will take place throughout the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. Meetups are being held in some cities, or you can participate remotely. All constructive edits are welcome in order to contribute to Wikipedia's mission of providing quality, accurate information. Articles within Category:LGBT in the Americas may be of particular interest. You can also upload LGBT-related images by participating in Wikimedia Commons' LGBT-related photo challenge. You are encouraged to share the results of your work here. Happy editing! --Another Believer _(Talk) 20:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject North America at Wikimania 2014

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) 09:35, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

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)

RFC at Talk: United States

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

There is an Request for Comments in process at Talk: United States concerning the scope of area and population figures for the United States. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:42, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The issue of the scope of United States is now in formal mediation. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:37, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

RFC at White Mexicans

There is a [[WP:RFC|Request for Comments in process at White Mexicans concerning the inclusion of two sections to the lede of the article. Please participate in the RFC. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:37, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!

• What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
• When? June 2015
• How can you help?

  1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here

  2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)

  3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

RfC United States same-sex marriage map

I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas?. Prcc27 (talk) 04:39, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

RfC

Hello there! There's an ongoing RfC concerning Paul Singer and WP:NPOV in a broader sense, that you might care to comment on. Thank you, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 01:42, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

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) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

List of mountain peaks of North America

The List of mountain peaks of North America has been nominated for Featured List. We would very much appreciate your comments at Featured list candidates. Thanks,  Buaidh  05:01, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Categories of ancient periods (up to 500 CE) by continent have been nominated for discussion

Category:496 establishments in North America and many similar categories have been nominated for possible upmerging. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:12, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

List of fatal cougar attacks in North America

A discussion has been started regarding the factual accuracy of some of the information in this article. Your input is requested here. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 16:08, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

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   07:50, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Canada for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Canada is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Canada until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:52, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

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)

Please see - Submissions

https://wikiconference.org/wiki/Submissions
--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:23, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

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

• 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)

Jews of Color

Please contribute to this new article draft on Jews of Color.--Coin945 (talk) 20:10, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

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) 17:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Notice

A merge proposal has been posted at Talk:Pan-American Highway#Merge proposal. - wolf 09:53, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

"Danish America" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Danish America has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 25 § Danish America until a consensus is reached. -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 23:34, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Monarchies in the Americas

Monarchies in the Americas has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:45, 2 January 2024 (UTC)