Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs)
11,637,095 edits
m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)
 
(32 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Wikipedia 1.0 Navigation}}
{{Wikipedia 1.0 Navigation}}


Please give feedback here on the articles selected for Version 0.7 from your WikiProject's lists.  Please indicate the project, the article that should be removed, and why.  Please also sign your posting.  Thanks! [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 22:01, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Please give feedback here on the Version 0.7 offline release. This will help us make things better for Version 0.8. Thanks! [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 06:47, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


== News? ==
== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject North East England]] assessment ==


Any news on how this is doing? [[User:Dottydotdot|Dottydotdot]] ([[User talk:Dottydotdot|talk]]) 12:02, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, the [[http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/WikiProject_Tyne_and_Wear.s0.html list] seems like a fair selection, although I would hazzard that [[Alastair Reynolds]]'s importance to the project was "overrated" and probably shouldn't be included. Also, rather than [[Michael Carrick]], I would suggest that [[Alan Shearer]] would be the better bet as far as "famous Northern footballers" go. I have also noted some omisions, mainly our fault due to the lack of talk page tags - I think [[Durham Cathedral]] and [[Durham University]] would also be pretty important to include, as well as [[George Stephenson]]. '''[[User:Bob Castle|Bob]]''' <small>'''[[User talk:Bob Castle|talk]]'''</small> 21:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
:Currently I'm trying to work through [[Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Badwords_cleanup|>20,000 possible cases of vandalism]]; this has been very slow because of my "real life" work commitments. That is why I've been working on the same task for several months - pretty much on my own - no one else seems interested in such a tedious task! Starting this weekend, I now have much more time to work on this task, and I expect to (finally!) finish it in less than a month, if I can work on it for a couple of hours each day. Meanwhile, the publisher (who is writing the offline user interface) has made an alpha version available, but the software is very "buggy" - quite a few internal links cause it to crash completely. I have done a pretty thorough test of it, and reported the errors to the publisher. If you'd like to help, please let me know. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 19:03, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
:I definitely concur with these, great suggestions. Since Version 0.7 has a Geordie coordinating it, you can be sure that we'll also include all Newcastle United players since the club began. And of course, no Sunderland players! Cheers, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 01:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
::I don't know if I'll be able to help but I'm a bit confused about how you remove them-are you removing them from the live Wikipedia or from a dump? [[User:Dottydotdot|Dottydotdot]] ([[User talk:Dottydotdot|talk]]) 19:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
:OK, I checked up on these suggestions, and all are already selected by other projects.
:::From [http://en.mirror.kiwix.org/index.php/Main_Page this dump], which is the current online iteration of Version 0.7. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:22, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
:*Durham University - already included under WikiProject Universities (total score 1296).
:*Durham Cathedral - already included under WP:Anglicanism (total score 1309).
:*Alan Shearer - already included under English Footballers, total score 1564 (one of the highest ranked English footballers!). Carrick makes it onto the same list, much lower down.
We'll note that Reynolds should be removed from the NE England selection. Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 02:43, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


== Is it available yet? ==
== [[WP:NIN|WikiProject Nintendo]]: Seattle Mariners ==


Has 0.7 been released? If so, how do I download it? [[User:Axl|<span style="color:#808000;">'''Axl'''</span>]] <span style="color:#3CB371;">¤</span> [[User talk:Axl|<span style="color:#808000; font-size:smaller;">[Talk]</span>]] 09:37, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
I am quite boggled as to why [[Seattle Mariners]] was chosen for WikiProject Nintendo. The only relation it has is that it was owned by former Nintendo president Hiroshi Yamauchi. As such they have very little relation or impact on Nintendo or video gaming for that matter.  '''''[[User:Bibliomaniac15|<font color="black">bibliomaniac</font>]][[User talk:Bibliomaniac15|<font color="red">1</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Bibliomaniac15|<font color="blue">5</font>]]''''' 22:58, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
:Please refer to: [[Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team#Version_0.7_-_should_FINALLY_be_published_soon.21|Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Version 0.7 - should FINALLY be published soon!]]... [[User:Ivan Akira|Ivan Akira]] ([[User talk:Ivan Akira|talk]]) 11:35, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
:They're owned by Nintendo now, if I remember correctly. '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 16:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
::The infobox on the Seattle Mariners page confirms that, Nintendo are the current owners. But we'll try to make sure that the article doesn't get indexed as a video game! [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 02:55, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
::Yes, should be in the next few days - I'm discussing the official launch date with Linterweb at the moment. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 15:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
:::Any update on the release date? [[User:Kaldari|Kaldari]] ([[User talk:Kaldari|talk]]) 18:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
::::They told me February 1st, but it they were a bit vague about that! I just had an email today, indicating that the Iraq index was fixed. The release version is already unofficially available [http://www.okawix.com/zenos/wikipedia-en-0.7.okawix here]. I also heard from the WikiTrust people tonight, they are actively working on a tool to allow us to select unvandalised article versions. Once that works (may be a few months), we'll start work on Version 0.8 soon afterwards, with the expectation that we can produce that release MUCH faster! [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 06:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
:::::The Windows and Linux versions seem OK, but the Mac version had some bugs, so we're still waiting on that before we make the announcement. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 06:14, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


== Pageview stats ==
== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Italy task force]] selection ==


Hi, just to let you know the list seems to be influenced by too much of [[WP:RECENTISM]], including players who did not actually mark any particular success during their stay in Italy (or still did not), such as [[Savo Milošević]], [[Jon Dahl Tomasson]], [[Mark Bresciano]] and [[Nwankwo Kanu]]. The absence of people like [[Giovanni Trapattoni]], [[Roberto Mancini]] and [[Walter Zenga]], as well as the [[Italian Football Federation]] article, is instead somewhat surprising. Thank you. --[[User:Angelo.romano|Angelo]] ([[User talk:Angelo.romano|talk]]) 22:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
:Yes, that's an ongoing problem on WP, and our selection is affected by that.  The main way to overcome it is if the project assesses the older important topics higher than the newer ones, and by working to improve the quality of the older ones.  I'll treat your comments as a nomination for Trapattoni, Mancini and Zenga. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 07:56, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
::OK, I checked up on these. These articles were selected for the Football project in general, not for their importance to Italy, but they are listed under Italy too because of the task force tag. The four articles you suggest are all important, but unfortunately the three footballers are only Start-Class and the IFF article is only a Stub, and that means that they are not really suitable for a nomination. I think perhaps the Trapattoni article could rate as C-Class, would you agree with that? If so, we could pass that one, at least. I think that the project should try to get the others up to B-Class, at least, and that would make them easy choices for the next release. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:04, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


After a recent request, I added Version 0.7 to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at [[Wikipedia:Version 0.7/Popular pages]].
==WikiProject The Simpsons==
According to [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/The_Simpsons.s0.html this] list of articles selected for the release, seven (seemlingly random) of 20 seasons of The Simpsons have been selected. It would make more sense to either include all 20, or just stick to the [[List of The Simpsons episodes|master list]] (which I would prefer, because half of the seasons are in very poor quality). It also wouldn't hurt to remove Hans Zimmer from the project there, because he really hasn't done anything for the show (other than score the movie). -- [[User:Scorpion0422|Scorpion]]<sup>[[user talk:Scorpion0422|0422]]</sup> 23:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
:OK, we can do that - we'll include the master list, but exclude the seven random seasons. Zimmer makes it into the selection also through WP:Biography, so that article will be on the DVD anyway. Do you want it indexed under Simpsons, or not? Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the [[tools:~alexz/pop/|toolserver tool]]. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! <span style="font-family:Broadway;">[[User:Mr.Z-man|Mr.]][[User talk:Mr.Z-man|'''''Z-'''man'']]</span> 03:32, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
== WikiProject Equine ==


:Very nice results! Now the new 1.0 bot is live, it'll be interesting to compare data. Thank you, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 05:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
My recommendations for the list: 
*Either add [[Mare]] to the list, given that you have [[stallion]] and [[gelding]] there already.  Alternatively, dump all three and replace with [[horse breeding]].
*Removing [[Knight]] from the WPEQ list (though it may be worth keeping in another category) and replacing it with [[Horses in the Middle Ages]], which is a GA class article.
*Add [[draft horse]] as a complement to [[pony]], which is already on the list.
*Add [[horse tack]], possibly replacing [[saddle]] and [[stirrup]], which are both decent articles (and better quality than Horse tack), but there is a need for the article that provides an overview.  Or at least add [[bridle]] to go with the saddle and stirrup articles.
*Add [[Driving (horse)]], but drop [[show jumping]] and [[polo]], both of which are already covered in [[Equestrianism]].
*Consider adding [[horse care]]


== Indexing problem ==
That's all I have for now.  [[User:Montanabw|<font color="006600">Montanabw</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Montanabw|(talk)]]</sup> 23:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
I have installed Kiwix and I can search without problems. However, when I click on the indexes, nothing happens <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/91.194.221.231|91.194.221.231]] ([[User talk:91.194.221.231|talk]]) 09:17, 18 August 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


:Just dropping in my opinion as another WP:Equine member that I agree with all of Montana's points! [[User:Dana boomer|Dana boomer]] ([[User talk:Dana boomer|talk]]) 20:11, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
:OK, I'll mention this to [[User:Kelson]], who handles that. Can you tell us what sort of operating system you're using? BTW, we're preparing Version 0.8 this week, and hope to have a Kiwix version available by October. Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 16:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
::Will do. I'll treat the "add" suggestions as nominations, but everything looks very reasonable to me. For the 1.0 team, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 01:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


Windows XP. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/91.194.221.231|91.194.221.231]] ([[User talk:91.194.221.231|talk]]) 08:46, 19 August 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==ScoutingWikiProject==
Suggest removing, at least as as Scouting WP is concerned:
*[[Carl_XVI_Gustaf_of_Sweden]] a world leader, but not a big deal Scouting-wise. <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — [[User:Rlevse|<span style="color:#060;">'''''R''levse'''</span>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 23:58, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
*[[David Lynch]] not a big deal Scouting-wise. <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — [[User:Rlevse|<span style="color:#060;">'''''R''levse'''</span>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 23:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
*[[Fergie_(singer)]] minor Scouting-wise but a major singer ;-) <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — [[User:Rlevse|<span style="color:#060;">'''''R''levse'''</span>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 00:02, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
*[[Auld_Lang_Syne]] minor Scouting-wise but a major song <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — [[User:Rlevse|<span style="color:#060;">'''''R''levse'''</span>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 00:02, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:OK, thanks! I checked and all these make it into V0.7 through more appropriate selections (Sweden, Biography and Songs). The project listings will be used for making indexes - do you want these four de-listed from WP:Scouting? Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 01:56, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


== Kiwix vs. Okawix ==
== [[Wikipedia: WikiProject Blackadder]] assessment ==


Under what circumstances would I want upload one versus the other? I have Windows 7 if that helps. [[User:Marcus Qwertyus|<span style="color:#21421E;font-family:Papyrus;">'''Marcus'''</span>]] [[User talk:Marcus Qwertyus|<span style="color:#CC7722;font-family:Papyrus;">'''Qwertyus'''</span>]] 03:35, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I realise that [[Douglas Haig, 1st Earl Haig]] and [[Richard III of England]] aren't there for the "Blackadder" element, but if any articles [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/Blackadder.s0.html were to be included] from the [[Wikipedia: WikiProject Blackadder|Blackadder project]], I imagine the main series article (''[[Blackadder]]'') and perhaps some of the individual season articles (''[[The Black Adder]]'', ''[[Blackadder II]]'', ''[[Blackadder the Third]]'' and ''[[Blackadder Goes Forth]]'') would be the most relevant. Of these, the final series is probably the most important for inclusion. '''[[User:Bob Castle|Bob]]''' <small>'''[[User talk:Bob Castle|talk]]'''</small> 00:03, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:IMHO we should definitely have [[Blackadder]], but I'm unconvinced about having the other four. I regard Blackadder as my all-time favourite comedy show, except perhaps Red Dwarf, so I'm definitely biased in favour, but I think the main series article should suffice here. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 02:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm inclined to agree in terms of importance, considering the limited number of articles for the CD. The only problem is that the main ''Blackadder'' page is pretty awful at the moment, because it's trying to talk about what are essentially four completely different series and a bunch of specials, and as a result ends up being quite original-researchy. In addition there are so many lists of different episodes and characters it just looks a mess, plus it desperately needs referencing. '''[[User:Bob Castle|Bob]]''' <small>'''[[User talk:Bob Castle|talk]]'''</small> 07:36, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
::It would be good if the project can clean up the main flagship article, because it would be hard to make the case for having five articles on Blackadder, even though it is a superb series! At least this is only a trial release, the large-scale 1.0 release isn't planned for at least a year. Cheers, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 15:34, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
:::OK, I see that a bit of cleanup has been done, so I think we'll go with the main article for now. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 06:00, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


== Evolution ==
==[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia]] assessment==
Hi, ''[[Banksia brownii]]'' is an obscure plant that never should have been rated "mid" for Australia. I have demoted it to "low", and I recommend you remove it from your list of selections. [[User talk:Hesperian|Hesperian]] 00:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


Why The Córvus-Córvǐx is it called "Evolution and intelligent design"??! It should just be "Evolution". ID is mere lies, and should not be in "Natural science".[[User:Assistant N|75]][[User talk:Assistant N|*]] 16:39, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
==[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Tennessee]] assessment==
I was surprised to see [[Middle Tennessee State University]] on the list, particularly as the only state educational institution on the list. This is a public university that is not the state's "flagship public university" (that would be [[University of Tennessee]]). Its rating as "High" in importance must be the act of a loyal alumnus, not an objective judgment of its significance to the state's story. IMO, it should be removed from the list<s> -- and possibly replaced by [[University of Tennessee]]</s>. --[[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 01:40, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:I believe this proposal was based on a false assumption; in fact, both Vanderbilt and U-Tenn are included. As the largest undergrad institution in the state, a very large school, with a B-Class article, I see no reason to exclude the article. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 04:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


if no-one objects, I will put the ID articles under religion and fix it.[[User:Assistant N|75]][[User talk:Assistant N|*]] 17:26, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Firearms]] assessment ==


== Popular pages tool update ==
Pretty good list, although [[Ballistic missile]] should not have been selected from our project, as that was a mistag. Ballistic missiles are not firearms. I would suggest [[Webley Revolver]] (a featured article) or [[M4 Carbine]] (the second most popular firearm article in Wikipedia according to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Firearms/Popular_pages|this list]]) in its place.--[[User:LWF|LWF]] ([[User talk:LWF|talk]]) 02:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
OK. The M4 is already selected under Military History, and I'll nominate the Webley for you. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:34, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


== WikiProject District of Columbia ==


As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to [[Wikipedia:Wikimedia Labs|Wikimedia Tool Labs]]. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).
Hi. I wanted to comment on a number of changes that need to be made to selected articles for Wikipedia Version 0.7 from [[Wikipedia:WikiProject District of Columbia]].


Web tools, to replace the ones at [[tools:~alexz/pop]], will become available over the next few weeks at [[toollabs:popularpages]]. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The [[toollabs:popularpages/view.php|tool to view historical data]] is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available [[toollabs:popularpages/config.php|now]] (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. [[mw:Help:OAuth|OAuth]] is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.
The following articles were mistakenly tagged as belonging in the DC Wikiproject:
*[[Minority Report (film)]]
*[[The Exorcist (film)]]
*[[Newsweek]]
*[[The X-Files]]
*[[Independence Day (film)]]
*[[Dikembe Mutombo]]
*[[The West Wing]]


If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the [[User:Mr.Z-man/Popular pages FAQ|updated FAQ]] or contact me on my talk page. [[User:Mr.Z-bot|Mr.Z-bot]] ([[User talk:Mr.Z-bot|talk]]) (for <span style="font-family:Broadway">[[User:Mr.Z-man|Mr.]][[User talk:Mr.Z-man|'''''Z-'''man'']]</span>) 05:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
The article on [[Pete Sampras]] should probably be removed from this list of selected articles because although he born in DC, Sampras moved to California as a child and has had no further connection with the city.


== Popular pages report ==
Thanks for your work. Best, [[User:Epicadam|epicAdam]]<sup>([[User talk:Epicadam|talk]])</sup> 03:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:OK, will do. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


We – [[m:Community Tech|Community Tech]] – are happy to announce that the [[m:Community Tech/Popular pages bot|Popular pages bot]] is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, {{no ping|Community Tech bot}} will post at [[{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}/Popular pages]] with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of {{ROOTPAGENAME:{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}}}.
== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Led Zeppelin]] assessment ==
Hi, I am a member of this wikiproject and I feel that none of the articles should be included. Despite many attempts to try and clean-up to improve quality and balance, the articles are still far from being anywhere near encyclopaedic (all of the articles listed for inclusion have already been judged B class or lower during classification - nowhere near good enough). To include them for selection would be a grave injustice. There are also a number of bogus/libellous claims that are defamatory and despite numerous attempts to remove them, a small clique of editors has been continually reinstating these claims. It is therefore with much regret, I am opposed to any inclusion of articles from the Led Zeppelin wikiproject as it stands. [[User:MegX|MegX]] ([[User talk:MegX|talk]]) 03:38, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
:As I mentioned on your project's talk page, I don't think we can omit such a major article as [[Led Zeppelin]], but we will otherwise accept the concerns of you and others in the project. I hope that the project will be able to get usable versions of the main articles ready in time for the next release. Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:11, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
* The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
::Even when there is a clear majority against it? Obviously consensus doesn't mean anything. The only person wanting to add it is you. There are at least 5 other editors opposed to it. [[User:MegX|MegX]] ([[User talk:MegX|talk]]) 04:27, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
* The report will include a link to the [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/ pageviews tool] for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
* The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).


We're grateful to {{no ping|Mr.Z-man}} for his original {{no ping|Mr.Z-bot}}, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of {{ROOTPAGENAME:{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}}}, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at [[m:User talk:Community Tech bot]].
== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Alaska]] assessment ==


Warm regards, [[m:Community Tech|the Community Tech Team]] 17:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
The [[Hudson Bay Company]] article doesn't appear to be particularly relevant to Alaska. In fact, the word "Alaska" does not appear within that article. I have removed the article from WP Alaska, and the article should probably also be removed from the selection of articles for v.0.7. -- [[User:Shunpiker|Shunpiker]] ([[User talk:Shunpiker|talk]]) 04:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Johan (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Johan_(WMF)/Target_lists/EnWikiWikiProjects201705&oldid=16776555 -->
:Ditto for [[Larry Sanger]]. This is another example of a well linked-to article that was added to the project, but which has only a tenuous claim to the scope of the project. -- [[User:Shunpiker|Shunpiker]] ([[User talk:Shunpiker|talk]]) 13:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:OK, noted. The HBC article will be included under WP:Canada, and Sanger under WP:Wikipedia, so both will be on the DVD, but we'll exclude it from Alaska in the index. Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


== RfC: Remove "adult" as a descriptor from the opening sentence of ''[[Family Guy]]'' ==
== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Hungary]] assessment ==
''Remove'':
*[[Bratislava]] (though important in Hungarian history, it is in Slovakia since the Treaty of Trianon)
*[[Axis powers]] (not important enough, not representative of Hungarian history)
*[[Mátyás Rákosi]] (a number of historical figures are way more important than this Communist politician)
*[[MALÉV]] (not important, not Hungarian-owned anymore)


I've made a proposal to have "adult" removed from the opening sentence of ''[[Family Guy]]'' at [[Talk:Family Guy#RfC: Remove "adult" as a descriptor from the opening sentence]]. [[User:Curly Turkey|Curly&nbsp;"JFC"&nbsp;Turkey]]&nbsp;<span style="color:red">🍁</span>&nbsp;[[User talk:Curly Turkey|''¡gobble!'']] 13:15, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
''Should add'':
*[[Stephen I of Hungary]] (definitely, how could you miss that article?)
*[[Holy Crown of Hungary]] (well-written, important)
*[[Kingdom of Hungary]]
[[User:Squash Racket|Squash Racket]] ([[User talk:Squash Racket|talk]]) 05:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


==Discussion at [[RfC: Should the immigration section include material about Trump's family separation policy?]]==
:All done as requested - though I do note that Hungary is classed as an Axis power. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 02:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
[[File:Farm-Fresh eye.png|15px|link=|alt=]]&nbsp;You are invited to join the discussion at [[RfC: Should the immigration section include material about Trump's family separation policy?]]. - [[user:MrX|Mr]][[user talk:MrX|X]] 🖋 11:52, 19 June 2018 (UTC)<!-- [[Template:Please see]] -->

== WikiProject:Freemasonry-related ==

[[Solomon]] and [[Acacia]] are tangential; they figure into Freemasonry, but there's not more than a sentence that can be said about each in a Masonic context.  The other two are fine, and I'm sure that after further review some other articles can be found. [[User:MSJapan|MSJapan]] ([[User talk:MSJapan|talk]]) 05:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

==[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Texas A&M]]-related==
Only three articles from this project were selected ([[Texas A&M]], [[George H. W. Bush]], and [[Robert Gates]]). While these are certainly noteworthy, they do not present a complete picture of the University. For expansion, I would recommend:
*[[Fightin' Texas Aggie Band]] FA and featured on the main page
*[[Aggie Bonfire]] FA and featured on the main page
*[[Texas A&M Corps of Cadets]] essentially was the student population for nearly 100 years. While not essential it does expand the breadth of knowledge on the University and provides perspective
*[[History of Texas A&M University]] a significant expansion to the main [[Texas A&M]] article.
*[[Traditions of Texas A&M University]] an expansion of the myriad traditions at the school. Again, not essential, but given the vast expanse of traditions, this would contribute to breadth on the subject.
<span style="background-color: maroon; color: white">[[User:BQZip01|<font color="white">'''—&nbsp;''BQZip01''&nbsp;—'''</font>]]</span>&nbsp;<sup>[[User_talk:BQZip01|talk]]</sup> 06:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:This request is excessive. This is a project to create an encyclopedia for the world, not an encyclopedia of Texas A&M lore. --[[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 17:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
::There are a lot of major universities from around the world that have no article on them, so this case is hard to make, though I suspect the band and bonfire, as FAs, might make it into a larger selection. Thanks for the noms, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 06:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

== Wikipedia:WikiProject Sydney assessment  ==

It's a pity that two rugby league teams ([[Sydney Roosters]], [[South Sydney Rabbitohs]]) are included but no other football codes. Is it possible to tweak the numbers so that [[Sydney Swans]] is included; they are just below the present cutoff [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/Sydney.0.html]. [[User:WWGB|WWGB]] ([[User talk:WWGB|talk]]) 06:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:I don't see a compelling reason to add the Swans, sorry! [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 02:02, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[WP:WikiProject Celts]] assessment ==

One glaring omission from [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/Celts.0.html the list] is [[Irish language]], which for some reason never got tagged as being part of WikiProject Celts, even though the articles of all other modern Celtic languages were tagged. I've added the tag now, but the article should definitely be considered. It's certainly more important to the topic of the WikiProject than [[Galicia (Spain)]] is. —[[User:Angr|'''An''']][[User talk:Angr|''gr'']] 07:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:It was selected (with a very high score) for WP:Languages - we'll try to see if we can get a Celtic tag on it in the index if possible. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 06:34, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

== Australian music articles to remove ==

From [[User:SelectionBot/0.7/A-6#Australian music]], the following should be removed;
*[[2 Hearts]]
*[[ARIA Charts]]
*[[Diorama (album)]] (unless you want to keep it because it's FA)
*[[Impossible Princess]]
*[[Odyssey Number Five]]
*[[Universal Music Group]]
Thank you. [[User:Giggy|Giggy]] ([[User talk:Giggy|talk]]) 07:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

==WP:FILMS article selection question==
Our project is planning on working to find reliable revisions for our selected list. Recently, we had a drive to reassess our B-class articles and the list was reduced from 1,000 to about 250 (the majority were downgraded to start/stub class). The current list does not reflect the assessment changes. Should we remove the articles from the list that are Start class? Also, our project does not use the importance parameter, but should we just include all of the 250 B-class articles (each one of the articles went through a checklist of determining their quality)? I figured I should leave a message here to determine if this impacts the number of articles from our project that can be included in the release. --[[User:Nehrams2020|Nehrams2020]] ([[User talk:Nehrams2020|talk]]) 08:06, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:Sorry I didn't reply earlier, I was away at a conference last week.  I believe that Films doesn't use C-Class, is that correct?  I think for this release, which is only a test release still, the best thing would be to review the list of demoted articles and indicate if any of these are (a) particularly bad or (b) relatively obscure.  Importance plays a major part in the selection, and that's why quite a few Start-Class film articles have been included.  Going from B to Start is equivalent to subtracting 150 points from the score - so you could also use that to judge.  Does that answer your question OK?  Cheers, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 08:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
::I think that another problem is that while we don't have an importance parameter in our banner anymore, we ''do'' have a [[WP:FILMCORE|core film topics]] list. It's understandable that something non-standardized like this would be missed in an initial run, but perhaps this can somehow be factored into a revised score? Our core list is much less plagued by recentism bias, additionally. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 01:32, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
:::That's a really nice list, I think we'll have to consider how to handle it. We only have a handful of people trying to coordinate V0.7 - write code for bots, procedure, fix errors, review articles, etc - so a big list like that is difficult for us to focus too much attention on. I think we could easily agree to take all articles from that list that are C-Class or above - the Start-Class ones are a bit trickier.
:::If you want to get this list into the 1.0 system for future releases, there are several approaches. WP:Biography doesn't use the importance parameter - with good reason - but they have a core list (put together in consultation with 1.0 people for V0.5), and that simply has all 200 articles tagged as Top-importance. These are mostly names that no one would disagree are important - Napoleon, Einstein, etc. Meanwhile WP:Chem has a core list (which was in fact the original inspiration for the 1.0 assessment system), but these aren't necessarily the most important, they are designed to provide a ''representative'' selection of chemicals from all areas; with that list, the 1.0 bot picks up a core=yes tag and generates a completely separate list. You can see both lists over at [[Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index]]; see if either of these methods would work for WP:Films. Till then, we'll do our best to handle it manually. Cheers, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 16:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
::::I think that what I was aiming at was giving the equivalent of Top-importance points to anything in the core list, instead of solely relying on hit-counts, which seems to have plagued the current crop of 0.7 selections. But if you guys have your hands full already, I suppose that's something that we might be able to factor in on our own. How many articles should we be aiming at, though? Nehrams points out that the original selection picked out about 600 articles, whereas your suggestion would only vet about 40, and this is quite a difference. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 02:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::I want to check what you mean by "would only vet about 40"? Do you mean the ones that are C-Class or above? I think to go beyond that, we'd need to review the articles one by one. I would propose that we get 2 or 3 reviewers from WP:FILMS, who could sign up for the WP1.0 Review Team then manually review all of the Start-Class articles - that way we could perhaps get through the main ones by October 20th, and ideally note the VersionIDs as well. Is this feasible? [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 18:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
:If you view the Core list, all of the articles that are B-class or above are ~40 articles. We would probably be able to get a few people from the project to assist in reviewing the start-class articles, but what criteria would be used? If we were still to include the FA/GAs that aren't on the core list but in the list that the bot presented, that would add a couple hundred articles for our project. --[[User:Nehrams2020|Nehrams2020]] ([[User talk:Nehrams2020|talk]]) 20:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
::I think it might be easier to go back to the CSV file, re-adjust the importance scores back by multiplying them all by 3/4, and then add the Top-importance-level 400 points to only the core articles. (Which is what I plan on doing today.) Then we'll look at what articles would exceed the selection points threshold. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 20:41, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
:::That sounds like it would work pretty well. Nice job. --[[User:Nehrams2020|Nehrams2020]] ([[User talk:Nehrams2020|talk]]) 20:56, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
::::Yes, as long as you're OK with that, that is certainly an efficient way. I would suggest doing a "reality check", though, to make sure that these Start-Class articles are ones that you're comfortable including. WP:Films has a pretty high ranking, so that Top-importance tag will bring in a lot of Start-Class (more than most projects), so you will want to be sure that they're not going to embarrass the project! If you need help with the CSV processing, let us know, but if you know how to do this yourself (I don't!) then I would do so. Cheers, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 21:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Okay, so I've got a list [[User:Girolamo Savonarola/V0.7|'''here''']] (WARNING - page exceeds 1 MB) which has the re-adjustments I was able to work out via spreadsheet, to derive a selection equivalent to having an importance parameter. (All of the [[WP:FILMCORE|core articles]] were valued at 400 pts, equivalent to a Top-importance selection.) The table includes a complete points breakdown, if anyone wants to check. I also cut off the results below 400 points total, so as to have a page within the acceptable byte-limit for the wiki.

This new list has 201 entries (between [[Film]] and [[Picnic at Hanging Rock (film)|Picnic at Hanging Rock]]) which meet the 1250-point threshold, which is about a third of the original selection, but - IMHO - more historically balanced that the original selection. There are still some entries that undoubtedly don't have any real place here, such as X-Men 3 or Indiana Jones 4, as well as more justifiable but still questionable ones such as Iron Man or Zodiac, but this is all essentially the problem of over-reliance on transitory hit-counts resulting in picks for recent blockbusters. It seems fair to say that were the hit-count normalized by averaging it out over a more considerable period of time, then this particular recentism-bias would be somewhat smoothed out. Oh well.

On the other hand, I have no interest in exerting my particular aesthetic mores upon the list and cherry-picking other entries - if the 0.7 project feels that more articles are warranted for selection, then they can of course continue to admit further entries from the top of this adjusted list. I believe, however, that any deficiencies within the selected group will simply have to remain furnished as evidence that the Bot formulae continue to need tweaking, although I must say that on the whole, the overall selected list has yielded a strong collection, for the most part. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:49, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

:Yes, I think this list looks pretty reasonable - and someone has to choose what is Top and what is High or Mid! I think that as long as other WP:Film people consider this to be reasonable, then we at 1.0 should consider these for inclusion. After all, the only reason they weren't on before is because the project doesn't use importance tags, not because the films are non-notable, and I recognised most of the films as very significant. The hit-counts thing is an issue, and we wanted to use a longer timeframe, but the data are apparently both hard to get and hard to work with, though CBM (a mathematician) has included some smoothing to offset sudden spikes. I think that by the next release we should have averages over longer periods to work with, and they will avoid problems caused by box office releases, appearing on the front page, etc. In the meantime, I'll ask some other 1.0 people to look over the new film selection. Cheers, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 06:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Football]] assessment ==

I echo the sentiment [[#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football.2FItaly_task_force_selection|above]] about recentism - some players such as [[Kenwyne Jones]] really don't belong on merit from my POV, and articles about recent individual matches or tournaments (e.g. [[2007 UEFA Champions League Final]]) are recentist too. From a UK point of view, I would like to see [[William McGregor]], [[C. W. Alcock]], [[Arthur Wharton]], [[Leigh Richmond Roose]], [[Alex James (footballer)]], [[Cliff Bastin]], [[Walter Winterbottom]], [[Billy Wright (footballer)]] & [[Bob Paisley]] all in there.

Also [[Niels Bohr]] did play football but is better known for his achievements as a physicist, ditto [[Rod Stewart]], [[Paul Allen]], [[Liam Neeson]] & [[Drew Carey]] are all more famous for things other than football - they should all be definitely removed from this list (obviously nothing against inclusion in more relevant Wikiprojects, though). [[User:Qwghlm|Qwghlm]] ([[User talk:Qwghlm|talk]]) 08:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:I agree with the above. A lot of the recentism tends to be due to the quality of older articles (or the fact that they haven't been assessed properly), and hit count. I counter this with the fact that a fairly recent featured article is obviously going to get a lot of hits, especially if it has had a peer review and/or failed an FAC. I think hit count should have a slightly lower weighting in future; it's important, but I'm not sure the balance is quite right.

:My main reason for coming to this page was to say that [[UEFA Euro 2016]] and [[2018 FIFA World Cup bids]] is going too far into the future. Up to and possibly including the 2014 World Cup is understandable (I disagree, but understand) but going beyond that seems silly. [[User:BeL1EveR|BeL1EveR]] ([[User talk:BeL1EveR|talk]]) 16:57, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
::Despite writing most of the content in both articles, I don't think [[Macclesfield Town F.C.]] or [[Paul Dickov]] are significant enough for inclusion. [[Croke Park]] is significant for Gaelic football, but not so much for association football. [[Julio Iglesias]] is another off-topic one. [[User:Oldelpaso|Oldelpaso]] ([[User talk:Oldelpaso|talk]]) 15:43, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

:OK: [[William McGregor]] has been included, but the other suggestions in the first paragraph are mostly Start-Class articles. If you can bring these up to GA or FA standards, we can probably make a case to include them on the next release. The footballing celebrities are duly noted, along with the 2016 and 2018 articles and Oldelpaso's proposed removals. Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Buddhism]] ==

The main [[Buddhism]] article is in a mess. we're trying to reconstruct it, but that's likely to take a long time. The massive Western bias is gradually decreasing. i don't know what you can do about this. [[User:Peter jackson|Peter jackson]] ([[User talk:Peter jackson|talk]]) 10:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:I don't think we can omit such a major topic as this. Can you at least recommend the best VersionID for us? Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:22, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Hinduism/Vaishnavism]] ==

Articles like [[Satsvarupa dasa Goswami]] and [[Bhishma]] are not core articles for Vaishnaivism. [[George Harrison]] was wrongly labeled high for Hinduism.--[[User:Redtigerxyz|Redtigerxyz]] ([[User talk:Redtigerxyz|talk]]) 12:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:Both have been regraded but otherwise are suitable for the 0.7 release. <span style="font-family:Tahoma;">[[User:Wikidas|Wikidās ॐ]]</span> 11:57, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
::Thanks a lot! [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:22, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
:::The ones that were regraded will still make it in, but I've suggested not listing Harrison under Hinduism. Bhishna was not regraded, so I've left it in the collection. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 17:25, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[WP:QOTSA|Queens of the Stone Age task force]] articles ==
The 3 articles automatically selected are [[Queens of the Stone Age]], [[Mark Lanegan]] and [[Era Vulgaris (album)]]. Lanegan is only a guest member of the band, and far less important than the only permanent member, [[Josh Homme]]. Similarly, while ''[[Era Vulgaris (album)|Era Vulgaris]]'' was critically and commercially mediocre, ''[[Songs for the Deaf]]'' was critically acclaimed and best-selling. As the Homme and ''SFTD'' articles are the 4th and 5th highest scoring articles identified by the bot, I would suggest selecting them in place of the Lanegan and ''EV'' articles. Respectfully, <font color="404040">[[User talk:Skomorokh|<font face="Garamond" color="black">the skomorokh</font>]]</font> 14:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:Will do. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
::I've looked at Josh Homme, and I see that it is only C-Class and carries an OR tag - that pretty much rules out including it, when it gets a lower importance score as well. If it can be brought up to B-Class and the OR removed, it should pass just fine. I will therefore leave in the Era Vulgaris article, since it is a GA. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 17:34, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

== WikiProject Irish Republicanism ==

A note on some of the articles selected [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/Irish_Republicanism.s0.html]:
*[[Easter Rising]] is currently undergoing a major re-write.  This may take six to eight weeks, and will hopefully result in a GA.  You can take it the job is complete when the lead is re-written.  Please do not add it before it is ready.
*[[Sinn Féin]] is the subject of lively [[Talk:Sinn Féin#Move pre-1970 history to History of Sinn Féin|discussion]] at the moment.  It might be wise to await the outcome of that before adding the article.
*I have added a {{tl|cleanup}} tag to [[Provisional Irish Republican Army]].
Thanks.  [[User:Scolaire|Scolaire]] ([[User talk:Scolaire|talk]]) 15:04, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:Edits on Easter Rising seem to have stopped, so I have to assume that it is as ready as it will be. The Troubles at Sinn Féin seem to have been resolved, as have the cleanup tag at the Provisional IRA, so I assume we can use these two as is. All three are ranked very high, so we don't want to omit them unless there is something major involving libel or copyvios. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 17:45, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

== Wikipedia:WikiProject Norway assessment ==

A few comments:
* I would suggest removing the sole county article, [[Finnmark]], as I don't see any reason why it is any more important than any other county. It would probably be a better idea to add all of the region articles ([[Western Norway]], [[Northern Norway]], [[Eastern Norway]], [[Southern Norway]], and [[Trøndelag]]). The exception to this is, of course, [[Oslo]], which is a county in itself.
* [[AIM-120 AMRAAM]] is not related to Norway in any other way than being operated by the country's military.
* The same goes for [[AGM-114 Hellfire]].
* I would suggest replacing , which is the city's largest team.
* I don't see [[Krag-Jørgensen]] as important enough to be in 0.7, but it ''is'' an FA.
* [[Hammerfest]] should probably be replaced by [[Alta, Norway]], which is the county's largest city (neither is the county capital).
* [[Douglas Engelbart]], [[Renée Zellweger]] and [[Earl Warren]] are only related to Norway through being Norwegian-Americans.
* [[Congress of Vienna]] is related to Norway only through Sweden (and thus also Norway) being present at the congress.
* [[Bodø]] is much larger than [[Narvik]], and is located in the same county.
* As above, [[Ålesund]] is much larger than [[Molde]], and is located in the same county.
--[[User:Aqwis|Aqwis]] ([[User talk:Aqwis|talk]] – [[Special:Contributions/Aqwis|contributions]]) 15:38, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

** Yes, but Norway was the first country to use AMRAAM in in a SAM mode (wich took some development together with Raytheon), see [[NASAMS]]. [[User:Orcaborealis|Orcaborealis]] ([[User talk:Orcaborealis|talk]]) 16:04, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
: We will remove any Norway listing for the military things, except the K-J. Likewise with the Americans and the Congress. The Bodø article has been swapped for Narvik (they both seem fairly similar in quality despite different ratings), and I have added Alesund (as well as Molde, which is perfectly OK). I didn't swap Alta, Norway for Hammerfest, because the former is a much weaker article. I've swapped [[FC Lyn Oslo]] for [[Vålerenga IF Fotball]], and tagged the latter for WP:Norway. The region articles are in pretty poor shape, and so I don't want to use those at all - but I agree, if these were B-Class, we'd love to have them. Finnmark is picked also for WP:Arctic, so it'll be in the collection anyway. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 18:18, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

== Wikipedia:WikiProject Microbiology assessment ==

;Removals
* The articles on [[microscope]] and [[microscopy]] are largely redundant. I'd suggest removing [[microscope]] from the list since it is the lower-quality article.
* Remove [[coccus]] from the list, this isn't a particularly vital topic and was mis-assigned on the importance scale.
* Remove [[Chlamydia infection]] from the list, this is more of a medical topic than a microbiology one.
* [[Secretion]] is a MCB topic, not restricted to microbes and is a feature of life in general. I'd suggest removing this from the Micro list.

;Additions
* [[Algae]] is an important topic in microbiology, this article should be included.
* [[Microbial metabolism]] is an important topic in microbiology, this article should be included.
--[[User:TimVickers|Tim Vickers]] ([[User talk:TimVickers|talk]]) 15:49, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

All done except for the last one - it's simply not major enough to go onto the DVD, though if it were a GA or FA I think I'd make a case for it to be included. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:31, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

==Wikipedia:WikiProject MCB assessment ==
;Removals
* [[Hydrolysis]] is a chemistry topic, I'd suggest removing this from the MCB list.
* The stub [[Mutant]] is redundant with [[mutation]], I'd recommend removing mutant from the MCB list.
* The articles on [[Conservation of mass]] and [[Organic compound]] are chemistry, not MCB topics. Remove from list.
* [[Coccus]] and [[Microbiological culture]] are microbiology topics, not MCB. Remove from MCB list.
* [[Amphiphile]], [[hydrophobe]] and [[hydrophile]] are general physical chemistry topics, I'd recommend removing these from the MCB list.
* [[Essential amino acid]] isn't a core topic. Remove from MCB list.
* [[Atherosclerosis]] is a medical topic. Remove from MCB list.
* [[Diffusion]] is a physics article. Remove from MCB list.
;Additions
* [[Immunology]] is a major field.
* [[Phagocytosis]] is an important process.
* [[Introduction to genetics]] would be a good addition.
--[[User:TimVickers|Tim Vickers]] ([[User talk:TimVickers|talk]]) 16:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

:I pretty much agree, though I'd have thought essential amino acids were important in molecular biology - everything done as requested. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

==[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities]] assessment==
I suggest adding the following to the selection list:
*[[Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur]] - first one below the cutoff score; an internationally important institution, featured article
*[[City University of New York]] - an important institution, both for itself and as a forerunner of its type; also shortly below the cutoff score
*[[Charles University in Prague]] - one of the oldest universities in Europe and the largest in its country
*[[University of Helsinki]] - oldest and largest university in Finland
*[[University College Dublin]] - the largest university in its country
*[[University of Western Australia]] - one of Australia's first-rank universities<br />
Additionally, I am puzzled by the inclusion of [[Amherst College]], [[Bates College]], [[Ohio Wesleyan University]], and [[Wesleyan University]], alone among [[Liberal arts colleges in the United States]]. It seems to me that it is merely serendipitous that these particular schools scored in the selection range, while other highly regarded and/or historically important schools of this type (for example, [[Williams College]], [[Swarthmore College]], [[Mount Holyoke College]], [[Carleton College]], [[Vassar College]], and [[Smith College]]) did not. (Ohio Wesleyan is not even all that highly regarded.) Rather than including just four schools from this group, either expand the selection or include the blanket article about this type of school. --[[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 17:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
:I teach at a liberal arts college myself, and I think I'd agree, though Bates and Amherst are appropriate schools IMHO. I'll treat your suggestions as nominations. We have a 1.0 team member teaching at U-WA, I'm sure he'd support that nomination! [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
:OK, I looked at everything closely. From the noms list I added three, but held three - the Helsinki, CUNY and UWA entries are too weak in quality for articles of this level of importance. We are clearly not going to have all major liberal arts colleges, but it seems OK for us to have a few representative example. Even if we removed these, some others will pop up under other projects; for example many colleges are listed under their home state (and some have been selected). It looks as if the main reason Ohio Wesleyan was selected was because it's an FA; if Smith or Vassar were FA they would surely be listed too - but Smith is only Start-Class. So I'm proposing to leave those as they are. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 04:27, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

==[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Furry]] assessment==

[[Furry fandom]] itself is a good choice, but I would like to withdraw [[anthropomorphism]]. I don't think it is of the quality required, nor will it reach it anytime soon.

In its place, I suggest [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|17px]] [[furry convention]] and [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|17px]] [[fursuit]]. Both are [[:Category:High-importance furry articles|high-importance furry articles]], illustrated, heavily referenced, and stable. They are [[Wikipedia:Key article|key articles]] for our topic; elements of furry fandom most likely to be referenced by the average person.

I understand space is limited; if these have to be held for a later revision, we can adjust the main furry fandom article to include more details in these areas. [[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]] ([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]]) 22:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

==[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Gilbert and Sullivan]] assessment==
Frankly, the selection was pretty awful, leaving out all but one of Gilbert and Sullivan's operas, including two featured articles. Although it may have run into problems with the slightly eccentric rating scheme used - in short, pretty much everything above "Low" importance is the core material on the subject - the selection is bizarre and should be redone. [[User:Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday|Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday]] ([[User talk:Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday|talk]]) 03:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

:The issue is there are only about 30,000 article slots in this release. When there are over 2,500,000 topics in Wikipedia, that means only 1.2% of articles will get in. Considering the size of the WikiProject (~280 articles), a fair share would be about three, so the four that have been selected is already "more than it deserves". The [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/Gilbert_and_Sullivan.0.html external popularity] of [[Gilbert and Sullivan]] would have been used to determine the score scaling factor for your WikiProject. Compared to, say, [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/The_Simpsons.0.html The Simpsons], that factor is not high. The priority is on topics that are considered core - or, failing that, which people are likely to look up - and these may not be the "best" ones, but the most popular ones (e.g. FA [[Creatures of Impulse]] scores lower than the C-class [[Major-General's Song]] because the latter has thirty times the hits). It's been suggested that featured articles do matter, but you might have to nominate them. Personally, if there was room to add any I'd choose ''[[H.M.S. Pinafore]]'' and ''[[The Pirates of Penzance]]'', although it would be a shame to exclude ''[[Trial by Jury]]'' and ''[[Thespis (opera)|Thespis]]'' which have clearly had a lot of work done on them. But there may not be room. On a positive note, the main article contains significant amounts of information from these four articles, and several others. [[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]] ([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]]) 04:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
::[[Creatures of Impulse]] was always going to be questionable, but I would seriously ask what the goal is for this release, and whether using an algorithm, then presenting the results as a ''fait accompli'' was really a good way to go about it. You must have known that springing such things on Wikipedia was going to set you up for criticism, particularly when a little liasing with the WikiProjects beforehand, etc, would have made people much more ready to accept the results.  [[User:Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday|Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday]] ([[User talk:Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday|talk]]) 09:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:::Who's "you"? I came here for the same reason. :-) The project's [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#General background|stated goal]] is to "start with a core of quality articles on key subjects and expand from there." This is probably the first release in which topics such as Gilbert and Sullivan are being considered at all; the main purpose appears to be getting as broad coverage as possible for one DVD - not necessarily the highest quality articles, but those covering the most topics. In many projects, only the very topmost "summary articles" may be strictly necessary to achieve this goal. I agree the schedule is a little optimistic, given the tenfold increase in size (and perhaps an even greater increase in project participation). The message sent to WikiProjects could also have explained the purpose and methods in a better way. Still, from an outsider's perspective, the automated process does appear to have correctly ranked of the "most important" articles - the article on Gilbert, Sullivan, the summary of their collaboration, and their most frequently performed opera. If you could only choose four articles from the project, which ones would you have picked instead, and why? [[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]] ([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]]) 21:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
::::I'd probably switch the Mikado for H.M.S. Pinafore - it's a stronger article, quality-wise, as it's the subject of a major FA push (slightly slowed by illness and the Gilbert and Sullivan festival). Also, [[Trial by Jury]] and [[Thespis (opera)]] *are* featured, [[The Mikado]] is a weakish B-class.
::::[[H.M.S. Pinafore]], [[Trial by Jury]], and [[The Pirates of Penzance]] were, at most, a few points short. I don't know, had I not been faced with insistence on how perfect the algorhithms were, or if it had not been presented as an unchangable ''fait accompli'', I'd have probably accepted it already. As it is, I have a featured article, [[Trial by Jury]], I spent months working on left out because our bottom-heavy rating scheme had labelled it "High" importance instead of "Top".  [[User:Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday|Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday]] ([[User talk:Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday|talk]]) 22:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago]] assessment ==

Hi, I am very impressed with the automated selections at http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/Chicago.s0.html .  I am amazed that pages like ''[[Cloud Gate]]'', ''[[Crown Fountain]]'', and [[Jay Pritzker Pavilion]] did not make your list, but I consider your list pretty fair.  Considering the first ten to miss the cutoff, ([[Charles_G._Dawes]], [[Susan_Sontag]], [[Zach_Braff]], [[Chicago_Fire_(soccer)]], [[Gloria_Swanson]], [[Wachowski_brothers]], [[Dwight_L._Moody]], [[Georg_Solti]], [[Mike_Ditka]], and [[Leo_Strauss]]), I am not going to complain too much. --[[User:TonyTheTiger|TonyTheTiger]] <small>([[User talk:TonyTheTiger|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/TonyTheTiger|c]]/[[User:TonyTheTiger/Antonio Vernon|bio]]/[[WP:CHICAGO]]/[[WP:LOTM]]) </small> 05:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks! I looked at the first three you mention- these look like nice articles, but it seems that they are not quite prominent enough topics to be included. Cheers, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 05:00, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket]] assessment ==

There are five articles in the cricket selection which are unsuitable. [[Samuel Beckett]] and [[Arthur Conan Doyle]] had only tenuous connections with cricket and are not representative. [[2007 Cricket World Cup]] is a controversial subject and I would argue that the article needs much more work to achieve a balanced view: there are several other articles rated B-class that are more appropriate than this one. [[The Ashes]] is a former featured article that has been demoted and is still being reviewed by [[WP:CRIC]] so I would say that is not ready. [[Batting average]] is really a baseball article and its cricket content is highly questionable (and, according to the cleanup tag, so is its baseball content).

The selection is heavily biased in favour of modern players and the number of these needs to be reduced. I would exclude [[Adam Gilchrist]], [[Harbhajan Singh]], [[Ian_Chappell]], [[Michael_Vaughan]], [[Paul_Collingwood]], [[Ricky_Ponting]], [[Sachin_Tendulkar]], [[Shane_Warne]] as superfluous. The other players are from each of the main countries except South Africa and New Zealand so you need to include a South African and a New Zealander. I would use [[Richard Hadlee]] and [[Morne Morkel]] which are both rated B-class.

Given that [[2007 Cricket World Cup]] adds to the modern bias as well as being a dubious topic, I would replace it with a historical competition to compensate. There are several of these rated B-class and the oldest in historical terms is [[History of cricket to 1725]], currently a GAN.

Apart from MCC, which is not a typical club, there are no clubs in the selection and I would include B-class [[Lancashire County Cricket Club]] as a modern example and [[Hambledon Club]] as a historic one.

There should be one article about someone who strongly influenced the sport as a patron or administrator rather than merely played it and a good choice for this would be [[John Sackville, 3rd Duke of Dorset]] (although he was a very good player too). And I think one of the sport's historic venues should be included so I would add [[Kennington Common]], which is a substantial B-class article.

There should be a writer and the best article is [[Harry Altham]], rated B-class.

Finally, I think there should be a flavour of cricket from outside its mainstream. There are several B-class articles about national teams that don't play Test cricket and [[Uganda national cricket team]] is as good as any. <b>[[User:BlackJack|BlackJack]] | <sup><i>[[User talk:BlackJack|talk page]]</i></sup></b> 10:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

:This makes a lot of sense, this kind of guidance is very helpful. Can we get a second opinion from another project member, just to make sure we're on track? [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

::OK, first three paragraphs of requests have been followed exactly. The Sackville, Kennington and Altham articles don't seem that great to me (or convincingly important) and were therefore omitted, but the Uganda one looks much better, and it's been added. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 05:36, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

::Correction - now I'm not so tired - I'd like to keep the Gilchrist and Chappell articles, because these are FAs that scored over 1350 - well over our threshold. They may be less important, but they are still notable, and as FAs they represent some of our best work. H Singh is selected for WP:India anyway. Also, in the second paragraph, Morkel is just way too low in importance. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 13:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I can't see [[Bodyline]] listed on the project page - that would be a serious omission. Looks like the best fit for it would be in "Sports events". --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 16:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Hadlee's a good choice for a NZ-er. If we're short of a SA cricketer, we should rally the WikiProject to improve an article: off the top of my head, one of [[Mike Procter]], [[Graeme Pollock]], [[Ali Bacher]] or controversially [[Hansie Cronje]], but perhaps he's too recent. I'll post to [[WT:CRIC]]. --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 16:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, the WikiProject has chosen '''[[Graeme Pollock]]''' to add to your DVD and done a lot of work in improving it. Could someone from the 0.7 team let us know how it's currently scoring, whether it's good enough and if not, what we can do to push its score higher. --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 17:03, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

==[[Wikipedia:Release Version|Wikipedia 0.7]] selected articles for Wikipedia:Wikiproject Neopaganism==

I think the list of articles to be included ([http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/Neopaganism.s0.html articles selected from this project]) should definitely be reconsidered. It seems to be spotty and non-representative. For example, the only humans whose articles are included are [[Varg Vikernes]], [[Heinrich Himmler]], and [[Virginia Woolf]]. The first two may or may not have been Neopagan, certainly not part of mainstream [[Neopaganism]], but they had nothing to do with the movement; that is, they were not shapers or contributors to the origins or development of the movement as would be [[Janet Farrar]] & [[Stewart Farrar]], [[Gerald Gardner]], [[Raymond Buckland]], [[Starhawk]], [[Gavin Frost]] & [[Yvonne Frost]], or even [[Aleister Crowley]]. I don't really know what Virginia Woolf is doing in the list. On the other hand, there are several articles included like [[Nymph]], [[Merlin]] and [[Deluge]] that seem to have nothing to do with Neopaganism.

IMO, someone should suggest a different list of articles to be included in this DVD that are characteristic of the discussions taking place in this project. Of course, I must admit I don't understand the criteria by which these were selected. [[User:Rosencomet|Rosencomet]] ([[User talk:Rosencomet|talk]]) 17:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:The project itself defines what articles are tagged, and the quality & importance levels of those articles. The bot simply collects those data, and includes some obvious importance data. So if articles have been wrongly tagged or assessed, the project should fix those ASAP, or they will come up again next time. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 05:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

:OK, I've looked over everything. The criteria are a balance of importance and quality. Crowley is already included in the collection, and I think we can add Gardner, who is B and close to the threshold. The other names you mention are all very low scoring, both on quality and importance statistics, and so we can't really include them at this time. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 17:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

==[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons]]==
Hi, I just nominated [[Forgotten Realms]] at [[Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations]] for what I figure is a good reason; however, it looks like there's a months-old backlog on that list, so I hope it doesn't go overlooked.  I mean, did I see stuff on there from over 6 months ago? :) [[User:BOZ|BOZ]] ([[User talk:BOZ|talk]]) 20:21, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
:Yes, it's in - and the backlog is clear! The 6 month old ones were held, not unreviewed, BTW. Thanks for the nom, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 05:48, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games]] assessment ==

*I recommend removal of ''[[Final Fantasy XIII]]'' because it has not yet been released. '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 02:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
*Recommending the removal of [[Lara Croft]] as well due to the condition of the article.--[[User:Kung Fu Man|Kung Fu Man]] ([[User talk:Kung Fu Man|talk]]) 02:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
*I'd also remove ''[[Marvel: Ultimate Alliance]]'', it's in very poor shape, and is of low importance. '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 14:11, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
*Remove [[fiscal year]], it's Start-Class and not a video game article. I've removed the WPVG banner from the talk page. '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 16:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
*Remove [[IGN]], very little article content outside the bulleted list marked with {{Tl|Trivia}}. '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 17:31, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
*Remove [[Bond girl]] as outside VG scope. <font color="#cc6600">[[User:David Fuchs|Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs]]</font><sup> <nowiki>(</nowiki><small><font color="#993300">[[User talk:David Fuchs|talk]]</font></small><nowiki>)</nowiki></sup> 17:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
* I'd push for the removal of [[Pokémon game mechanics]] for its low importance. I'd also push for the removal of low-quality low-importance video game articles such as [[Bully (video game)]] and [[Company of Heroes]]. In addition, I'd endorse the removal of unreleased games such as [[Final Fantasy XIII]], and articles such as [[fiscal year]] and [[bond girl]] that are barely within our scope. Include [[Shakugan no Shana]] as an article with very little relvence to our project. [[User:Randomran|Randomran]] ([[User talk:Randomran|talk]]) 21:25, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
**Strong disagreement. It's a split article from Pokémon (video game series), so it's essentially a part of Pokémon (video game series)'s importance. - [[User:A Link to the Past|A Link to the Past]] [[User talk:A Link to the Past|(talk)]] 19:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
*I'd recommend removing [[Lucky Star (manga)]] as it is only B-class and rated low-importance within the VG Project. It is primarily an anime and manga article, and the video game aspect of it is minor.<br>I also agree with the recommended removals listed above. ([[User:Guyinblack25|Guyinblack25]] <sup>[[User talk:Guyinblack25|talk]]</sup> 14:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC))

::OK, I've reviewed all of the above, and I'm removing all except the disputed one, Pokemon game mechanics . [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 06:18, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

*Remove ''[[Sonic Adventure]]''. Article is in poor shape and re-rated Start-Class. Not important enough to keep in this poor condition. '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 01:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
*Remove [[Ian McKellen]], not a video game article. '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 17:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
*Remove [[Flight simulator]], not in great shape, and not much vg-related content. '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 17:56, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
*Add Paper Mario - GA, somewhat important. - [[User:A Link to the Past|A Link to the Past]] [[User talk:A Link to the Past|(talk)]] 19:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
*Remove [[Mark Hamill]], [[Musical Instrument Digital Interface]], not VG-centric articles '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 20:38, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
*Remove ''[[Doom II: Hell on Earth]]'', lowered to Start-Class, no references, needs cleanup. '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 20:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
*I'd also like to point out about fifty previously B-class articles have been re-rated lower since last month. [[User:Nifboy|Nifboy]] ([[User talk:Nifboy|talk]]) 03:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

::OK, I agree with all of this second group of suggestions; many thanks! I'm aware that assessments are constantly changing, but we'll just try to do the best we can with the information available. Thanks for pointing out some of the more significant problems, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 19:59, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[WP:ENLANG]]  & [[WP:ETHNIC]] ==

* No articles from [[WP:ENLANG]]?
* Some of the articles from [[WP:ETHNIC]] may be controversial/POV. I will need to look at them closely, soon... and will probably ask that some be removed from your list. Off he top of my head, certainly ''X people in Y country'' articles like [[British Chinese]] should go right out. They are, in general, poorly sourced  POV/controversy magnets. The exception might be [[African Americans]], which of course has a boatload of boatloads of source material to draw from. [[User:Ling.Nut|Ling.Nut]] <sup>([[User talk:Ling.Nut|talk]]&mdash;[[User:Ling.Nut/3IAR|WP:3IAR]])</sup> 04:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

==[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Viruses]]==
'''Comment'''
* I have looked at the current selection of virus and virus-related articles and I don't think these are ready yet:
:*[[Orthomyxoviridae]]
:*[[Reverse transcriptase]]
:*[[Lassa fever]]
:*[[Virology]] - note all of this is in [[Virus]], I plan to initiate a merger discussion after the FAC nomination is closed

I think [[Hepatitis C]] should be included. [[User:GrahamColm|Graham <font color="blue">Colm</font>]] [[User talk:GrahamColm|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 12:12, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

::I've done all as requested except [[Reverse transcriptase]], which is pretty important for the MCB project. Although quite short, it is rated B with no cleanup tags, and could be a page for people to find useful links to other longer articles. Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 20:31, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

==[[WP:MESO]]==
I believe that the articles on [[Quetzalcoatl]], [[Aztec mythology]], [[Aztec]], and [[Aztec calendar]] are not good enough to include. They contain misleading, inaccurate and outdated information. I suggest including [[Aztec religion]] instead of Aztec mythology since it is in much better shape and has a more encyclopedic scope. You also might consider adding [[Tezcatlipoca]] instead of [[Quetzalcoatl]] since the article on this Aztec deity is in better shape. The main article [[Aztec]] is about to undergo massive transformation into a disambiguation page following a decision on the article talk page and the current article is not representative of what aztec coverance should be like or what it will be like in the near future.[[User:Maunus|·Maunus·<span class="Unicode">ƛ</span>·]] 05:25, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
:OK, we'll remove [[Quetzalcoatl]], [[Aztec mythology]], and [[Aztec calendar]], and add [[Aztec religion]] as you propose. I don't think we can realistically remove [[Aztec]], which receives about 100,000 hits per month, as this would leave a huge hole in the selection; I note that in the last eight weeks no major edits have been done except to remove the cuisine section (which I think lacked sources, or should I say sauces?!). Tezcatlipoca is only listed as Start-Class, while Quetzalcoatl is B-Class and more important, so I would find it hard to replace the latter with the former. Thanks for your help, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject History]] ==

* [[History of Ethiopia]] should be rmvd from list; very poor article in every way. [[User:Ling.Nut|Ling.Nut]] <sup>([[User talk:Ling.Nut|talk]]&mdash;[[User:Ling.Nut/3IAR|WP:3IAR]])</sup> 10:44, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

:Done. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[WP:CRO|WikiProject Croatia]] ==

I have noticed that [[Zagreb]] isn't included, although I recall seeing it on the list of articles that passed the nomination. [[User:Admiral Norton|Admiral Norton]] <sup>([[User talk:Admiral Norton|talk]])</sup> 21:52, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
:Yes, it looks like there was a tagging problem for WP:CRO (now fixed) on that article, but it doesn't matter because (a) all capitals of sovereign nations are included (I think I manually reviewed it last year), and (b) the article has [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/WikiProject_Cities.s0.html passed for WP:Cities] with a score of 1937, almost 700 over the cutoff score! BTW, last night I reviewed the manual nominations, and so [[Osijek]], [[Rijeka]] and [[Split]] are now also included, though I rated two of those articles as poorly sourced and therefore only C-Class. Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 13:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Earthquakes]] ==

* Please rmv [[2005 Kashmir earthquake]] from the list. [[User:Ling.Nut|Ling.Nut]] <sup>([[User talk:Ling.Nut|talk]]&mdash;[[User:Ling.Nut/3IAR|WP:3IAR]])</sup> 07:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

== [[WP:YORKS]]==
Unsure if this is the right place to ask the question but I was wondering why the list at [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-13/HTML/Yorkshire.s0.html articles selected from this project] does not match the list in the [[User:SelectionBot/0.7/XYZ-1|Yorkshire list]] to put in the selected versions against? [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 12:45, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
:I can't see any difference at this point. I'm not sure if the main list was updated a little bit, but now it matches. I find it both amazing and amusing that [[Huddersfield]] gets a lower score than [[Huddersfield Town F.C.]] - even on interwiki links! BTW, it would be nice to see [[Wakefield]] brought up to B-Class, so that it could make it into a future release, that seems like a fairly important Yorkshire town that would be nice to have. Cheers, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 14:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
::The differences have been corrected by a later upload - so the missing 10 are now there. Unsure how Leeds University got there but have not looked at it yet. Other towns would be [[Beverley]] which is the county town for the East Riding and [[Northallerton]] for North Yorkshire. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 15:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
:::If those two were B-Class I might support their nomination, but as Start-Class they're unlikely to make it. Leeds Uni is pretty major, I think, so it's not a bad one to have. I'm really surprised at the low score of Northallerton, even Dewsbury scored higher! I'd also suggest that besides Beverley, [[Harrogate]] and [[Yorkshire Dales]] would be other good articles to work on. BTW, in case you're wondering about my interest in Yorkshire, my mother grew up in [[North Ormesby|"Doggy"]], and my father was from [[Redcar]], and I used to work in the Tees estuary. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 03:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
::::Thanks for the information. Someone is currently working on [[Northallerton]] and has nominated it for GA a couple of days ago. The West Yorkshire articles are suffering from IP edits and POV pushing at the moment. [[User:Keith D|Keith D]] ([[User talk:Keith D|talk]]) 11:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
:::::I see Northallerton is now a GA, so it's being included. Thanks for the suggestion, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 04:31, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Krishnaism]] ==
A few pages to add to the list would be [[Radha Krishna]], [[Krishnaism]] and [[Svayam Bhagavan]]. All other articles on the list should stay. <span style="font-family:Tahoma;">[[User:Wikidas|Wikidās ॐ]]</span> 13:05, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

:I've tagged the first two, but Svayam Bhagavan is hard to justify when it is very low ranked and only assessed as Start-Class. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 04:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

==Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Islam-related==
I have few suggestion on the basis of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam/Assessment]]. 
# I suggest substitute [[Fiqh]](C-article) with [[Sources of Islamic law]](GA).
# [[Sharia]] has too many problems. It has several tags and hasn't reached to acceptable level.
# I suggest removing all of the articles which have POV, OR or disputed tags.--<font face="monospace">[[User:Sa.vakilian|Seyyed]]([[User talk:Sa.vakilian|t]]-[[Special:Contributions/Sa.vakilian|c]])</font> 12:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
:1 and 2 are now done. As for 3, I looked at lower quality, lower importance articles and based on your suggestion I removed [[Husayn ibn Ali]], [[Wahhabism]], [[Prophets of Islam]] and [[Jizya]]. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 04:46, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography]] ==

Pls rmv [[Aristotle Onassis]] from the list, per Not English, possible [[WP:BLP]] concerns, etc. [[User:Ling.Nut|Ling.Nut]] <sup>([[User talk:Ling.Nut|talk]]&mdash;[[User:Ling.Nut/3IAR|WP:3IAR]])</sup> 06:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
:Aristotle Onassis is not a living person. And what do you mean by "Not English"? Can there suddenly not be articles about Greeks in 0.7? --[[User:Aqwis|Aqwis]] ([[User talk:Aqwis|talk]] – [[Special:Contributions/Aqwis|contributions]]) 08:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
::Sorry if I was unclear. I wasn't talking about the subject being "not English"; I was referring to the grammar, which could use some copy editing. And even if [[WP:BLP]] is irrelevant, the article suffers from speculation that could be considered slanderous:
::* "which would explain the speed with which he made his first million dollars.."
::* "...and Onassis hospitality, what usually means good bribes"
:: [[User:Ling.Nut|Ling.Nut]] <sup>([[User talk:Ling.Nut|talk]]&mdash;[[User:Ling.Nut/3IAR|WP:3IAR]])</sup> 09:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
:::Agreed, this article seems to have quite a POV problem, it's not written in an encyclopedic style, and it's only Start, so removed. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 04:29, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:Featured topics]] assessment ==

Hmmm, this is interesting. The selection can be seen [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-23/HTML/Featured_topics.s0.html here]. Firstly, the importance levels are completely arbitrary, in terms of what v0.7 is trying to achieve here. Secondly, I'm not really sure [[WP:FT]] should be involved in this at all, it only is because SelectionBot picked up on [[WP:FT]]'s subscription to 1.0 bot, which is used to see if articles change class, not for rating article importance. Thirdly, if [[WP:FT]] IS going to be involved, then I guess any topics included should have the whole of their topics included, not part.

Potentially we could nominate every single article in a good and featured topic, as they are all good, featured or audited, so there would be no quality issues. Though some (such as the TV episodes) maybe aren't notable enough to be included. Thoughts? [[User:Rst20xx|rst20xx]] ([[User talk:Rst20xx|talk]]) 16:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

:Looking at the selection, it really is a fairly random selection of incomplete sets. I think these articles will either make it through their subject-based WikiProjects (and many will), not through a listing at WP:FT. For future releases we will have to work with you, and treat the sets as "all or nothing" nominations, but it's too late to organise something like that now. Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 05:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment]] ==

Please remove [[Anthony Burgess]] from this version. At present, the article is in a state of dispute, with efforts to improve it from what were essentially large laundry lists of Burgess trivia with no context or sourcing whatsoever for the lists. It cannot be ready in time for the deadline and would really reflect less than stellar on Wikipedia to be included at this time. Thanks. [[User:Wildhartlivie|Wildhartlivie]] ([[User talk:Wildhartlivie|talk]]) 08:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
:Done. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 05:02, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography]] ==

Please consider adding [[Jonestown]] and [[Peoples Temple]] articles as companions to the already included [[Jim Jones]]. These articles are necessary complements to the Jones article and delve into the events regarding Jones to a much greater degree. Both are in as good shape for inclusion as is Jones. All three will soon be candidates for at least [[WP:GA]] status on their way to [[WP:FA]] and contribute to the overall understanding of Peoples Temple events and history. Thanks. [[User:Wildhartlivie|Wildhartlivie]] ([[User talk:Wildhartlivie|talk]]) 08:27, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
:Already handled via the noms page, thanks for putting them on there. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 05:03, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[WP:AL|WikiProject Australian law]] selection ==

[[Edmund Barton]] (overall score 1283) was automatically selected for Australian law; a fair selection, but his political career (he was the first [[Prime Minister of Australia]]) is far more important than his legal career, so it should probably have been selected for [[WP:AUP|WikiProject Australian politics]].

I would suggest that either [[High Court of Australia]] (overall score 1142) or [[Constitution of Australia]] (overall score 998) would be more representative selections for the Australian law project. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]]&nbsp;([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 11:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

:Barton is indeed one of the highest ranked articles in the Australian politics selection, but I've noted that we shouldn't list it under law. I've added both of the law articles you suggest - they may score lower than some Simpsons episodes, but they are clearly important. Their low interwiki score is more a reflection of the fact that we have the subject split into more parts than most other languages, rather than any lack of importance for the subject material. Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 05:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

==[[WP:AL|WikiProject Visual arts]] selection ==
After discussion, these should be removed:
:[[Artist]] - scores hugely on links to it, but not much of an article
:[[Satsvarupa dasa Goswami]], American Hare Krishna leader - gotta go - 8k ghits, a pathetic 840 whits on your table; only scores because of being on far too many templates. '''Should not be included as part of any project'''.
:[[Academic art]]
:[[Graffitti]]

::I want to ask the new graffiti project for their opinion on the last article. I'll remove the others, though it would be really nice (pretty please?) if the VA project (and other art projects) could turn [[Artist]] into a full-blown article. You'd clearly get lots of readers! As for Goswami, I was puzzled, but when I checked the interwikis, these seem to be dead ends - either a more general article, or a "doesn't exist". These were counted in our ranking, so you're right - thanks!

Not sufficiently important from the VA pov, but may be for other projects:
:[[Victor Hugo]]
:[[Museum]]??
::Done [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 06:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

See further discussion [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts#Wikipedia_0.7_articles_have_been_selected_for_Visual_arts|here]]. Additions will be put on the other page.

[[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 20:32, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

*From the manual additions, these are too obscure:
:[[Paul Kane]],
:[[Art competitions at the Olympic Games]],
:[[Theory of Colours]] (book by Goethe)
[[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 14:23, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

::At such a late stage, I'm reluctant to remove articles from the 0.5 selection without a discussion, and so I'd rather leave them in for 0.7. None of them gets a score in the "really obscure" range for importance, and indeed, Paul Kane scores 1246 for the Biography project, just below the 1250 cutoff.

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music]] assessment ==

We don't have a list classification for our WikiProject, and since apparently lists have been purposefully excluded from Wikipedia 0.7, the following lists should be removed: [[Alice in Chains discography]], [[Depeche Mode discography]], [[Nine Inch Nails discography]], [[Nirvana discography]], [[Pearl Jam discography]], [[Radiohead discography]], [[Red Hot Chili Peppers discography]], and [[Soundgarden discography]].

After much discussion on the project talk page, we have decided that the following should not be included in Wikipedia 0.7, either due to their limited importance outside of the scope of alternative rock, lackluster article quality unsuitable for a physical Wikipedia release, or incorrect tagging as part of the project: [[Sunny Day Real Estate]], [[Carl Barât]], [[Thrice]], [[The Presidents of the United States of America (band)]], [[AFI (band)]], [[Public Image Ltd.]], [[Massive Attack]], [[The Living End]], [[Era Vulgaris (album)]], [[Mark Lanegan]], [[Breaking Benjamin]], [[Independent music]], [[Temple of the Dog]], [[Adam Clayton]], [[Feeder]], [[Deftones]], [[The Fray]], [[Editors]], [[Black Holes & Revelations]], [[Indie rock]], [[30 Seconds to Mars]], [[Achtung Baby]], [[Babyshambles]], [[Bloc Party]], [[Diorama (album)]], [[Ghosts I–IV]], [[Gorillaz]], [[Kaiser Chiefs]], [[Keane (band)]], [[One Hot Minute]], [[Sufjan Stevens]], and [[The Decemberists]]. [[User:WesleyDodds|WesleyDodds]] ([[User talk:WesleyDodds|talk]]) 06:59, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
:Done. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 06:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Fashion]] requested removals ==

After some discussion at the talk page, the following should be removed as too peripheral: many actresses who once had a make-up line etc: [[Hilary Duff]], [[1950s]] , [[Gwen Stefani]], [[Victoria Beckham]], [[Acne vulgaris]], [[Jennifer_Lopez]], [[Paris Hilton]], [[Milla_Jovovich]], [[Chloë_Sevigny]], [[Heidi_Klum]], [[Tyra_Banks]], [[Elizabeth Hurley]], [[The Bold and the Beautiful]]. Additions will be nominated on the other page. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 19:22, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

:OK, duly noted, we'll try to get these unlisted when we compile the index. These people will all make it in under WP:BIO anyway. Thanks, [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 08:29, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

== Requested removal. ==

Currently, both [[cannon]] and [[history of cannon]] are listed for inclusion; these two articles are, for all intents and purposes, identical. I suggest that history of cannon be removed, as it a "fragment" of the main article. · [[User:AO|<font face="Times New Roman" color="Black">'''A'''''ndonic'''''O'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:AO|<font face="Times New Roman" color="Navy">'''''Engage.'''''</font>]]</sup> 20:20, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

== WikiProject Time ==

As far as I can tell all the months and days of the week are in 0.7 except for [[Tuesday]] and [[Wednesday]]. This seems odd and those two should be added for continuity. [[User:Zginder|Z]][[User Talk:Zginder|gin]][[Special:Contributions/Zginder|der]] 2008-10-26T19:34Z ([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]])
:Actually, those two days are in as well. Thanks for the checkup though - the bot doesn't understand such things, and we need a human to spot them. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 07:03, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

== Very confused ==

As a newcomer to this concept, I really can't work out what is and isn't approved for v0.7. The project page here has so many confusing disclaimers about what may or may not be omitted and I couldn't make head or tail of the links. Now, I'm a simple soul, but I'm not ''totally'' thick. Could someone review what it says in the heading on the project page and make it a bit easier to follow? Thanks. --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 20:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

:The reason - this page is very much in transition. Version 0.7 has officially closed for nominations, and there is a LOT of work going on behind the scenes tying up the loose ends from pages such as the above. Once this work has been completed - we had hoped last weekend, but it dragged into this weekend - you will be able to see a complete list. After that, you'll see a set of indexes and a description, and then an actual offline release. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 20:35, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

== Release? ==

When is this selection going to be released exactly? Will there be a book? Where could I purchase it? Or on which site could I read the chosen articles? Will it be this year, or not until 2009? [[Special:Contributions/217.121.96.159|217.121.96.159]] ([[User talk:217.121.96.159|talk]]) 19:03, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
:I'm sorry, I should have checked back here sooner! There was a delay in publication, and the index took longer than planned, but we expect the collection to be released fairly soon (March 2009 looks reasonable). [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 22:19, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
:There won't be a book just yet, but there will be. This collection would actually be a bookshelf-full, not just one book! [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 22:19, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

== Definitive list of 0.7 articles ==

Where is the final, complete list of the articles selected for 0.7? --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 16:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Knock-Knock, anyone there? What's going on with 0.7?? [[User:Lwoodyiii|Lwoodyiii]] ([[User talk:Lwoodyiii|talk]]) 04:01, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

:Sorry, I was very busy when this came in, and then away when the knock-knock came, so both slipped through my watchlist. There is no one single list on-wiki, but you can see the selection in static form [http://tmp.kiwix.org/wp1en-0.7/articles/k/n/o/Knowledge.html here]. The index took longer than expected to assemble (I had to assign categories to 11,500 keywords by hand!), but it is close to ready now; once it is, that would be the best place to see the final list.
:What I can say is that everything on this page was carefully reviewed, and I think every project got feedback on what was excluded or included. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 22:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

::OK, the final list, including VersionIDs, is [http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-23/HTML/CSV/Selected.txt here]. We're doing cleanups at the moment, so a few VersionIDs may change, but the vast majority should stay the same. The article list is fixed at this point. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 14:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

:::[http://toolserver.org/~cbm/release-data/2008-9-23/HTML/CSV/Selected.txt toolserver] gives a four-o-four. The link is also at the top of the project page. [[User:Rickjpelleg|RickJP]] ([[User talk:Rickjpelleg|talk]]) 07:51, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

::::Yes, recently they had a purge on older files on the toolserver, which was short of space, and it looks as if this was archived. However, we now have '''[[User:SelectionBot/0.7alpha|this onwiki list]]''' which is complete. This doesn't list versionIDs, though. Thanks for letting us know! [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 11:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
::::The main toolserver list, linked from the top of the page, is still there (I had it restored after ''that'' got archived. However, the txt file I mentioned a few paragraphs back is no longer there. I will see if we can get that posted somewhere. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 12:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

== A question about nominations ==

I'm curious about the [[Wikipedia:Version 0.7 Nominations|nominations page]]. It has some articles, like [[Dungeons & Dragons]] and [[Gary Gygax]] crossed off, but they haven't been reviewed yet... will they still get reviewed? Thanks. -[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|talk]]) 00:09, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
:Those articles were reviewed, but in a big hurry (so tags may not have been added at the time). Both of the articles you mentioned ARE already included in Version 0.7, so they didn't need a review. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 22:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
::Thanks; so the talk page templates should be updated to say that they are included? -[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|talk]]) 15:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
::Oh, and what about the other ''[[D&D]]''-related nominations? [[Drow (Dungeons & Dragons)]], [[Dragonlance]], [[Dave Arneson]], and [[Wizards of the Coast]]? Have they been reviewed? Thanks. -[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|talk]]) 15:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
:::We need to do talk page templates ASAP, but we have no scripts or bots ready to do that, and obviously our priority is to get the DVD produced ASAP. As soon as our part is completely done, we will do that. In the meantime, I may see if it's easy to generate a new complete list, just alphabetical; I think our bot-meister already has an offline copy of such a list. [[User:Walkerma|Walkerma]] ([[User talk:Walkerma|talk]]) 18:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
::::Okay, thanks. -[[User:Drilnoth|Drilnoth]] ([[User talk:Drilnoth|talk]]) 19:27, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 12:18, 4 February 2023

Wikipedia 1.0 — (talk)
FAQ — To do
Release version tools
Guide — (talk) — (stats)
Article selection process
(talk)
Version 0.8 bot selection
Version 0.8 feedback
IRC channel (IRC)
Release criteria
Review team (FAQ)
Version 0.8 release
(manual selection) (t)
"Selection" project (Talk)

schools selection
Offline WP for Indian Schools

CORE TOPICS
CORE SUPPLEMENT
Core topics - 1,000
(Talk) (COTF) (bot)
TORRENT (Talk)
"Selection" project for kids ((t))
WORK VIA WIKI
PROJECTS (talk)
Pushing to 1.0 (talk)
Static content subcom.

Please give feedback here on the Version 0.7 offline release. This will help us make things better for Version 0.8. Thanks! Walkerma (talk) 06:47, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

News?

[edit]

Any news on how this is doing? Dottydotdot (talk) 12:02, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Currently I'm trying to work through >20,000 possible cases of vandalism; this has been very slow because of my "real life" work commitments. That is why I've been working on the same task for several months - pretty much on my own - no one else seems interested in such a tedious task! Starting this weekend, I now have much more time to work on this task, and I expect to (finally!) finish it in less than a month, if I can work on it for a couple of hours each day. Meanwhile, the publisher (who is writing the offline user interface) has made an alpha version available, but the software is very "buggy" - quite a few internal links cause it to crash completely. I have done a pretty thorough test of it, and reported the errors to the publisher. If you'd like to help, please let me know. Walkerma (talk) 19:03, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if I'll be able to help but I'm a bit confused about how you remove them-are you removing them from the live Wikipedia or from a dump? Dottydotdot (talk) 19:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
From this dump, which is the current online iteration of Version 0.7. Walkerma (talk) 03:22, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it available yet?

[edit]

Has 0.7 been released? If so, how do I download it? Axl ¤ [Talk] 09:37, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to: Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Version 0.7 - should FINALLY be published soon!... Ivan Akira (talk) 11:35, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, should be in the next few days - I'm discussing the official launch date with Linterweb at the moment. Walkerma (talk) 15:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Any update on the release date? Kaldari (talk) 18:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They told me February 1st, but it they were a bit vague about that! I just had an email today, indicating that the Iraq index was fixed. The release version is already unofficially available here. I also heard from the WikiTrust people tonight, they are actively working on a tool to allow us to select unvandalised article versions. Once that works (may be a few months), we'll start work on Version 0.8 soon afterwards, with the expectation that we can produce that release MUCH faster! Walkerma (talk) 06:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Windows and Linux versions seem OK, but the Mac version had some bugs, so we're still waiting on that before we make the announcement. Walkerma (talk) 06:14, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pageview stats

[edit]

After a recent request, I added Version 0.7 to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:Version 0.7/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 03:32, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice results! Now the new 1.0 bot is live, it'll be interesting to compare data. Thank you, Walkerma (talk) 05:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indexing problem

[edit]

I have installed Kiwix and I can search without problems. However, when I click on the indexes, nothing happens —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.194.221.231 (talk) 09:17, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll mention this to User:Kelson, who handles that. Can you tell us what sort of operating system you're using? BTW, we're preparing Version 0.8 this week, and hope to have a Kiwix version available by October. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 16:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Windows XP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.194.221.231 (talk) 08:46, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kiwix vs. Okawix

[edit]

Under what circumstances would I want upload one versus the other? I have Windows 7 if that helps. Marcus Qwertyus 03:35, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Evolution

[edit]

Why The Córvus-Córvǐx is it called "Evolution and intelligent design"??! It should just be "Evolution". ID is mere lies, and should not be in "Natural science".75* 16:39, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

if no-one objects, I will put the ID articles under religion and fix it.75* 17:26, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 05:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:Version 0.7/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of Version 0.7.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

  • The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
  • The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
  • The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of Version 0.7, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

RfC: Remove "adult" as a descriptor from the opening sentence of Family Guy

[edit]

I've made a proposal to have "adult" removed from the opening sentence of Family Guy at Talk:Family Guy#RfC: Remove "adult" as a descriptor from the opening sentence. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 13:15, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at RfC: Should the immigration section include material about Trump's family separation policy?

[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at RfC: Should the immigration section include material about Trump's family separation policy?. - MrX 🖋 11:52, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Version_0.7&oldid=1137398751"