Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council

To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject and all talk pages of subpages of Wikipedia:WikiProject Council redirect here.

WikiProject Council was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 18 April 2011.

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Q1: What's a WikiProject?

A1: A WikiProject is a group of people who want to work together. It is not a subject area, a collection of pages, or a list of articles tagged by the group.

Q2: How many WikiProjects are there?

A2: There are 927 WikiProjects tagged as "Active" (see Category:Active WikiProjects), and 244 WikiProjects tagged as "Semi-active" (see Category:Semi-active WikiProjects); many of these have one or more subsidiary task forces or work groups.

Q3: What's the biggest WikiProject?

A3: Nobody knows, because not all participants add their names to a membership list, and membership lists are almost always out of date. You can find out which projects' main pages are being watched by the most users at Wikipedia:Database reports/WikiProject watchers.

Q4: Which WikiProject has tagged the most articles as being within their scope?

A4: WikiProject Biography has tagged 2,051,020 articles, which is more than three times the size of the second largest number of pages tagged by a WikiProject. About ten groups have tagged more than 100,000 articles. You can see a list of projects and the number of articles they have assessed here.

Q5: Who gets to decide whether a WikiProject is permitted to tag an article?

A5: That is the exclusive right of the participants of the WikiProject. Editors at an article may neither force the group to tag an article nor refuse to permit them to tag an article. See WP:PROJGUIDE#OWN.

Q6: I think a couple of WikiProjects should be merged. Is that okay?

A6: You must ask the people who belong to those groups, even if the groups appear to be inactive. It's okay for different groups of people to be working on similar articles. WikiProjects are people, not lists of articles. If you identify and explain clear, practical benefits of a merger to all of the affected groups, they are likely to agree to combining into a larger group. However, if they object, then you may not merge the pages. For less-active groups, you may need to wait a month or more to make sure that no one objects.

Q7: I want to start a WikiProject. Am I required to advertise it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals and/or have a specific number of editors support it?

A7: No, there are no requirements. However, new WikiProjects, especially new groups that are proposed by new editors, rarely remain active for longer than a few months unless there are at least six or eight active editors involved at the time of creation.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26

See earlier archives at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject/Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by .

Shortcut

WT:COUNCIL

WikiProject technology share

Through my own WikiProject work and observing of others working in different WikiProjects, I've wondered why there doesn't seem to be a dedicated spot for us to share our technical ideas about how to better operate the WikiProjects. In more general venues, I see people asking questions about how to generate particular reports for their WikiProjects, as one example. From my own perspective, I sometimes feel like I want to share what I've done (as I can see potentially widespread benefits to some things I've conjured up), or alternatively thirst to see what others and other WikiProjects have done. What would be everyone's feel for a spot for WikiProjects sharing technical ideas? Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 00:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please. That's exactly what this page should be used for — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:46, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking in terms of an organized resource that can be cooperatively built, not unlike other technology resources we have, such as Wikipedia:User scripts. And of course, discussion about it would happen somewhere (likely on its own talk page, but certainly this talk page can be regularly directed to it). It would cover the various technical approaches that can be employed by WikiProjects, whether traditional or experimental, particularly looking at layout, navigation and data-driven aspects, such as reports, alerts and milestones, and possibly more. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 08:30, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Might be something that can be taken from the remains of Wikipedia:WikiProject X, although dividing discussion into more places doesn't feel the best idea. CMD (talk) 10:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there are chunks of X that can be used as-is or adapted for use by wikiprojects, it certainly makes sense to list them somewhere like on the "Technical notes" page. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 23:54, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that all of the code is open source, and I believe that the author would be very happy if someone adopted the codebase. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:00, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think very many people are working in that area.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/Technical notes could use some attention, and it would be an appropriate place to leave notes about scripts that are working. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:58, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WhatamIdoing, I welcome your thoughts here, but I'm torn on how to proceed. I was thinking in terms of an area where we document our various forms of technical experimentation in wikiprojects, and the lightly visited Technical notes page currently seems to cover generically helpful tools. I could certainly add some of those tools to the page. On the other hand, useful reports based on database queries I've been working on or unique navigation/layout approaches I've developed don't seem to have a place. Should we make a place for these experimental ideas on the page? I'm concerned that the usual approach for editing informational pages would get in the way of a true skunkworks effort. Perhaps for my experimental things, I should just create my own dedicated user page and point there from Technical notes? Of course I'm open to other ideas here. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 23:51, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@StefenTower, I think that "one-stop shopping" is generally the best first approach. The difficulty with linking to pages with other information is that you might not know that the thing you need is explained on the linked page.

I think another thing that would be helpful is if you "advertised" your work. An occasional note at WP:RAQ, perhaps? An offer to some of the more active (or relevant) WikiProjects to run a particular query for them? WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:22, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of the things I wish for is to have Wikipedia:Database reports/WikiProject watchers care about recent visitors to the talk page, instead of how many long-dormant accounts put the page on their watchlists 15 or 20 years ago. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Defunct projects in the directory

Defunct WikiProjects are not distinguished from inactive WikiProjects in the directory; should they be explictly marked as such (and have its replacement listed), moved to a different page or section, or removed entirely from the list? Xeroctic (talk) 16:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Xeroctic, are you talking about the Wikipedia:WikiProject Directory? WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:17, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am writing about the subpages of Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory, as the one you linked is unmaintained. Xeroctic (talk) 20:07, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wish that Reports bot were keeping the first one up to date, because maintaining Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory was always a chore and probably isn't being done now. The last time that page's contents were overhauled was when Chongkian went through the list more than a year ago.

I looked through Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Science#Medicine, and found that most of the smaller projects were either inactive or semi-active, even with a generous definition of "semi-active" (in practice; I just adjusted the tags on them). Most of them should be merged up to a larger group. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really hoping meta:Campaigns/WikiProjects will result in something like the automated directory coming back. – Joe (talk) 08:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As a baby step towards grouping WikiProjects, I wonder whether we could adapt the categories in mw:ORES/Articletopic#Taxonomy to create categories via {{WikiProject status}}. For example, Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games could be tagged as {{WikiProject status|active|culture}} or {{WikiProject status|active|media}} and be put in a Category:WikiProjects about culture or a Category:Media-related WikiProjects. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:42, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea. By the way, I started thinking through what ORES-based upmerging would look like at User:Joe Roe/WikiProject merging and listing the 'top level' projects at Template:WikiProjects navigation. Thoughts and additions welcome. – Joe (talk) 04:21, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

for the STEM group, I'm thinking about a set like this:

Wikipedia:WikiProject Science,
Wikipedia:WikiProject Chemistry,
Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics,
Wikipedia:WikiProject Biology,
Wikipedia:WikiProject Tree of Life (separate from the rest of biology because there are hundreds of thousands of species articles),
Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomy,
Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics,
Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine, and
Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment

but I'm not sure how to group:

but they all feel like they could be one group (or two or three). WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Three (Computing, Technology, and Engineering) would fit the ORES taxonomy but I'm not really familiar with these areas of the project. Alternatively there's the potential to use a 'catch-all' project (i.e. a new Wikipedia:WikiProject STEM in this case) to cover topics that could stand alone but aren't that active right now, until they're ready. Do feel free to add to the list! – Joe (talk) 09:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help with edit war?

I have been editing the page for a music festival, Pickathon, since yesterday and it has been in something of an edit war with two other editors. I would very much appreciate it if other music folks could weigh in on the various items in Talk:Pickathon Monkeywire (talk) 17:12, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the discussion is productive on that page, and you are getting useful advice — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:30, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declaration of inactive WikiProject

Can a WikiProject declare itself to be active by itself? [1] Haven't noticed it for roughly three months after I looked at the project I redesigned. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 05:58, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProjects are just groups of editors who share a common interest in a given area. If they're using the WikiProject pages to collaborate or facilitate editing in the area, then the project's active, and it doesn't matter who might make that determination. isaacl (talk) 07:08, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. If someone's active enough to notice the |inactive tag and remove it, then that user is probably active enough to answer questions on the talk page, which is good enough. WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:30, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah... I see. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 01:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category question

Is there an active category here with editors that specialize in a topic that would include COVID-19 lab leak theory? I guess this is in medicine and epidemiology and virology but I did not see those categories. Are there projects related to media and politics whose scope would touch on that topic? Lardlegwarmers (talk) 03:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't really have categories of editors, but we do have Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. That said, you have already initiated discussion on that article talkpage, and it is likely watched by most of those who are already interested in the topic. CMD (talk) 03:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and it's previously been (much) discussed at WP:FTN. Bon courage (talk) 02:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a WikiProject

Hello people! I just wanna ask if I can create a WikiProject without going to a official process? I'm planning to create a WikiProject for a girl group. Royiswariii Talk! 08:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide is worth a read. In summary creating a Wikiproject won't do much without having other editors on board. CMD (talk) 12:24, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Royiswariii, you should join Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Music and Wikipedia:WikiProject Pop music instead, and you should not attempt to start any separate WikiProjects until you have half a dozen other experienced editors who will publicly state that they will participate.

Years ago, I pulled some stats on WikiProjects that were successful (more specifically, that didn't completely fail within a few months). The two key indicators were: the person starting them had been editing for years (I notice you've been editing for only four months), and there were lots of people interested in working with that person (the more, the merrier, but 6 to 10 was usually enough). Most WikiProjects that didn't meet both of these criteria failed. In many cases, a couple of months later, nobody was posting and the original founder had stopped editing. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:31, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject approval process

Months ago, we said we'd update the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals process. I think we need to make a fundamental decision: Do we actually want any more WikiProjects?

Leaving aside the chance of a once-a-decade group like Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19, I'm currently wondering whether the answer is that we actually don't want to encourage WikiProjects. One possibility is to just say "No", or at least "No, unless you can produce a petition that will be listed on Wikipedia:Times that 100 Wikipedians supported something".

Another is to suggest a lightweight alternative, such as this:

Create a central page at User:Founder/Favorite_thing.
Create a shared watchlist by making a list of all articles you're interested in at User:Founder/Favorite_thing/Articles we support and then using Special:RecentChangesLinked on that page.
Do not create banners. Do not tag articles. Do not create categories. Do not spam links to your page. Do not do or say anything that suggests this is an official or permanent group of any sort.
Do invite your friends to work with you and to post on that page. Do invite individual editors who contribute to these articles to join you. Do post (once or twice) a link with an invitation at the most relevant WikiProject(s).
If your group maintains at least five active participants for a year, then those pages can be moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Favorite thing. Participation will be measured by them posting to User talk:Founder/Favorite_thing, not by quietly editing the articles. (If they're not posting on that page, then you don't need a WikiProject page. The point of the WikiProject page is for participants to coordinate the group's activities.) If you don't meet that standard but you want it out of your userspace, then ask the most closely related active WikiProject to adopt your group, whether by completely merging it away or as a WP:TASKFORCE.

If we'd done this from the start, we'd have far fewer defunct WikiProjects now. What do you think?

WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I generally support the premise that there are enough WikiProjects for any would-be WikiProject founder(s) to find an appropriate venue for collaboration. But, since many/most WPs are talk-inactive, I think that, rather than dilute the talk-pool further via User talk:Founder/Favorite_thing, just start using the most relevant WP from the start. If the traffic is enough to overwhelm the parent WP, then, based on the activity level & its duration leading up to that point, an informed decision can be made by the council & participants as to whether a TF or new WP is more appropriate. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 21:46, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's basically what I said in the earlier discussion: use an appropriate existing WikiProject to host discussion, and then after some time the involved participants can decide on the best ways of working. If no one's work is being impeded, then no change is needed. If there is some clash in operations, they can consider changes, such as splitting off discussion to a subpage, creating a task force to separate out article alerts, or (perhaps in some cases) creating a new WikiProject. isaacl (talk) 22:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject category RecentChanges

I can apply Special:RecentChangesLinked to various WikiProject categories, but it only tracks recent changes to the talk pages (since those are the pages tagged by the project banners).

Is there any way to get RecentChanges to display for the main pages corresponding to the talk pages in the category? Or a tool?

There used to be WP:XWT, which is now deprecated. Also a number of prominent topics (e.g., physics & math) for WP:1 'articles by quality' lists are deprecated (although a few are still working), as well as the replacement web tool. Tule-hog (talk) 18:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tule-hog, you need to make a list of the WikiProject's pages. For example, make a list of everything in Category:All WikiProject Medicine pages (or any similar category), use search-and-replace to remove the Talk: part of the file name, and then use Special:RecentChangesLinked on the page. This won't auto-update, so you'll need to update the list manually every now and again. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointer. Looks like its finally time to take a crack at Pywikibot. Tule-hog (talk) 21:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Reviving and Changing the name

Hi! I'm just asking if a WikiProject defunct can be revive and change the name? Royiswariii Talk! 16:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider the advice you were given at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council § Creating a WikiProject, and what I've previously suggested about using the most relevant active WikiProject to host discussion. isaacl (talk) 17:06, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]