Talk:WikiProject

"Cross-cutting WikiProjects are not just places to do types of work you enjoy, but they're also excellent places to discuss the finer nuances of article constru

Talk:WikiProject

Additional sources

"Cross-cutting WikiProjects are not just places to do types of work you enjoy, but they're also excellent places to discuss the finer nuances of article construction and how to get the most out of Wikipedia's powerful software tools".[1]

"WikiProjects are platforms for discussion about general issues, rather than cooperation and coordination centres".[2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by BD2412 (talkcontribs) 15:53, 10 August 2015‎

References

  1. ^ John Broughton, Wikipedia: The Missing Manual (2008), p. 165-175.
  2. ^ Jerzy Kociatkiewicz, ‎Monika Kostera, Liquid Organization: Zygmunt Bauman and Organization Theory (2014).
  • Bilogur, Aleksey (15 February 2016). "Analyzing WikiProjects". residentmar.io.

Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:29, 27 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Capitalization

This article is titled WikiProject, but variously uses that capitalization and "Wikiproject", with the lede suggesting that the former is correct. Usage in sources appears to be mixed. I would think "WikiProject" would be correct, especially since it's so dominant here. And we invented WikiProjects, didn't we? --BDD (talk) 13:54, 13 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Review/Help

I just created a new article about Legacy House. Can anyone give me some feedback/suggestion or even revise my article. Here are the website for Legacy House website with some notability news: Legacy House official site and news links

Enwiki WikiProject data

I have just removed all the data about the enWP's WikiProjects and their role in article assessment. This article is supposed to be about wikiprojects in general, giving such excessive information about their usage on a specific wiki is just inappropriate. Besides, the data is already duplicated across the articles on Wikipedia and English Wikipedia. 103.6.159.86 (talk) 07:05, 23 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Short description

The short description is a bit too long-how can we shorten it? EthanGaming7640 (talk) 17:07, 24 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

WikiProject Medicine

This article is heavily focused on WikiProject Medicine. Perhaps there's enough content and sourcing specifically about WikiProject Medicine to justify forking out a separate entry? Thoughts? ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:49, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think so, yeah. Manny Manatee (talk) 17:39, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
 Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:24, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
good job 👍 Manny Manatee (talk) 16:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! Surely there's a lot more content to add about the topic. Improvements welcome! ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:39, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Related: Talk:WikiProject_Medicine#Merger_discussion ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:16, 21 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

WikiProjects

How do you find out what wikiprojects there are? Manny Manatee (talk) 17:38, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Manny Manatee You may find Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory helpful. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:41, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thank you. Manny Manatee (talk) 17:43, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Edit request

I suggest adding the following sentence to WikiProject Medicine section, as the second sentence in the opening paragraph: "Activities of WikiProject Medicine have been discussed in the context of medical volunteering.[1]". I am suggesting this through COI as the reference I suggest is my own work. I believe it is the most recent and relevant work to make this statement.

References

  1. ^ Konieczny, Piotr (2023). "Where experts and amateurs meet: the ideological hobby of medical volunteering on Wikipedia". WikiJournal of Medicine. 10 (1): 5. doi:10.15347/wjm/2023.005.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:41, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Reply 21-NOV-2023

  Needs discussion  

  • In March 2023, the section covering Wikiproject Medicine was proposed to be forked to its own article. Shortly after this move was completed, a merger discussion then ensued, with the result being the information was placed back into this article. However, the result of that discussion was 2 supports (to merge), 1 delete, and one which prevaricated between support and delete. Figuratively taken this may indicate a tie. IMO, it signals that editor consensus was mixed at best as to whether the section should remain.
  • Seeing the consensus as possibly being mixed gives me pause in adding additional information to a section one editor from the discussion labeled as "naval gazing". To that end, it is requested that the proposing editor here discuss this addition with (at least) the editors involved in the earlier forking and merge discussions, as well as any other local editors who may be interested in this topic, in order to see if this information should be added to the article.

Regards,  Spintendo  01:47, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

See if I can reinstate

Seeing if I can fully reinstate my edit that was reverted by @Moxy. In my honest opinion Wikipedia:WikiProject is more suited for being an external link. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 00:12, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

How is an internal link better in the external link section? Best we don't go out of our way to confuse our readers. Moxy🍁 00:25, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Just noticed the removal of the link to the medical Wiki project..... can you please not go out of your way to make it harder for our readers to find information. Moxy🍁 00:28, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, I'll quickly explain that: it's a circular redirect. The article about that WikiProject no longer exists. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 00:31, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Or I think, it was merged. See here: WikiProject MedicineWikiProject Medicine. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 00:31, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Why are you removing the link to Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine now? How are our readers supposed to learn more about the project if we don't link the project. Yes we don't normally link internal pages in this matter but this whole page is about internal pages. Moxy🍁 00:36, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Oh, that's the INTERNAL page? I must've misread it. I apologize. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 00:38, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Sorry. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 00:39, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

I noticed there are no wikilinks (internal links) added to specific WikiProjects pages mentioned in the text. For example in the intro there's no link on WikiProject Medicine or WikiProject Women Scientists. In the next section there's no link added to WikiProject Council. I'm even seeing links to specific WikiProjects being actively removed. I would've expected to see links to the named groups so people can find them and join/contribute, but since most of them aren't linked I thought maybe there's a reason I'm not aware of. (If not, I'd like to add the links). BetsyRogers (talk) 21:41, 10 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Grammar

Bilingualism and Language Shift:A Study of intergenerational Language Transmission in Ikire Community Ogunsade Bolanle (talk) 07:40, 23 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Help with review of a page

Talk:SimulationX I made some suggestions as per the guidelines for this page. Can some one please look into this? thanks! MajidNas (talk) 09:14, 9 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.