Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Culture/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Article List

Culture: Zodiac | Smoking ban | Pseudoscience | Africa | Cherokee | Captain Kangaroo | Beer | ...

Comments and Suggestions

- I think this project is too big and too less advertised - The Featured article or Featured Picture havent been changed since... a very long time ago. Who has suggestions?

Improvement drive

Meditation is currently nominated on WP:IDRIVE. If you want to see it improved and could help us bring it up to featured standard, please vote for it here! --Fenice 08:59, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project

Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-Class and good B-Class articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles related to culture? We are also looking for FAs. Please post your suggestions here. Cheers!--Shanel 22:48, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

suggest merge...

I'm not gonna slap a Merge template atop a Project page. But I seriously suggest merging this project into Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups There seems to be a huge overlap. --Ling.Nut 18:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Project Directory

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 20:54, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

New infobox

Here Template:Infobox Artist. Arniep 17:43, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Stablepedia

Beginning cross-post.

See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 03:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.

Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afriad) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 15:52, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Aim for diagnosis

Could we have some opinions on why this project has so far failed? I would suspect the subject is too unspecific, i.e. not many are interested in working on a project that deals with generic culture, they want to be working with the specific parts of culture that resonate with their moods and preferences. Still, I would think that with a revised project goal this could be countered successfully. Could it for instance have a meta function vis-à-vis other WikiProjects like the ones on music, dance, books, film, television etc., being a resource repository, think tank and/or coordinating hub? Just by accepting the parentage of these various projects would attract people here, like me, who came here now frustrated that the Books WikiProject doesn't have a parent. __meco 22:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

An RfC on the appropriateness of an image in the Culture section of the WP:FA India

It would be very helpful if members of this project could weigh in on a dispute about the appropriateness of an image in the Culture section of a country page. The RfC is posted here. 22:29, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Notice of List articles

Page(s) related to this project have been created and/or added to one of the Wikipedia:Contents subpages (not by me).

This note is to let you know, so that experts in the field can expand them and check them for accuracy, and so that they can be added to any watchlists/tasklists, and have any appropriate project banners added, etc. Thanks. --Quiddity 18:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Inactive?

I am a representative of WP:WikiProject Popular Culture and I originally came here to see if this project would be our parent project. However, it seems this place is largely inactive. If anyone is still doing work around here, I would be interested to see if there could be any sort of collaboration between our projects. If not, no big deal. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 09:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

FAR

Scooby-Doo has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Ultra! 15:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Vital articles

Any editor with a broad knowledge of culture is invited to take a look at Wikipedia:Vital articles and offer suggestions on how to improve the list of 1000 vital Wikipedia articles, as well as on the process of choosing them. It suffers from a severe lack of attention and POV editing. — goethean ॐ 01:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Butter

Butter has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Ultra! 18:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Rename proposal for the lists of basic topics

This project's subject has a page in the set of Lists of basic topics.

See the proposal at the Village pump to change the names of all those pages.

The Transhumanist 09:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

A discussion

An important discussion on " Should WikiProjects get prior approval of other WikiProjects (Descendant or Related or any ) to tag articles that overlaps their scope ? " is open here . We welcome you to participate and give your valuable opinions. -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - , member of WikiProject Council. 14:18, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

TfD

This may be of interest: Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_November_2#Template:UK_underground. Ty 01:54, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

New Member

I'm new to the Project, just thought I'd introduce myself. Sean (talk || contribs) 04:35, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Pop culture history

Does this article have any redeeming features: Pop culture history, 1920-present? I'm thinking of nominating it for deletion as it is so poorly put together. The article creator removed the maintenance tags. Fences&Windows 03:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Culture of Malaysia

I've listed Culture of Malaysia for peer review here. All comments are more than welcome! Chipmunkdavis (talk) 16:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review discussion - Category:Worst Picture Golden Raspberry Award winners

Deletion review discussion regarding Golden Raspberry Award winners, please see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 December 1. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Inactive

Is this project active? I see mostly bot announcements and little if any discussion. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 22:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Tamil Nadu in India has many intangible culture heritage

In Tamil Nadu, which is in the SouthEastern India, in the Indian peninsula, has may such things, which can be inculded the heading, "Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity." The concerned people should research about it and update it.

For the information of people, In Russia, an all weather proof, nuclear explosion proof protection is given for a few books, and one of them is our Tamil scholarly contribution to the world, Thirukkural.

So, there are a lot of things in this ancient culture than can be included, which is being lost by invasion of English language in our language television, day-to-day life, etc. pls do the needful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.163.106.99 (talk) 08:26, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Proposal to change a section title

There's a proposal to adjust one of the main section titles used in "Wikipedia's contents". See Portal talk:Contents#Proposal for main section title adjustment. The Transhumanist 02:08, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposal to move some common sub-categories from Category:Cultures

Please view and comment my proposal - Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2011 October 29#Move some common sub-categories from Category:Cultures. --Averaver (talk) 14:43, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Creative Culture

WikiProject Globalization proposal

Hi WikiProject Culture members, A few of us are trying to get a WikiProject Globalization up and running. Members of this project would work together to improve the quality of articles on Wikipedia on Globalization, global issues and related topics. If you're interested in globalization, please come by and check out our proposal. We'd appreciate any feedback about our ideas, and of course your support if you were interested in lending it. Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 11:34, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Related: The article Globalization has undergone major re-structuring. WikiProject Culture members are invited to review and comment on the article and add relevant missing information or sections in which your project may have an interest. Also, you may be interested in reviewing the updated Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Globalization proposal for a new WikiProject. Regards, Meclee (talk) 14:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

New WikiProject Globalization

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Globalization is a new project to improve Wikipedia's coverage of aspects of Globalization and the organization of information and articles on this topic. This page and its subpages contain their suggestions and various resources; it is hoped that this project will help to focus the efforts of other Wikipedians interested in the topic. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Meclee (talk) 18:38, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Peer Review Request

Peer review has been requested and reviews will be appreciated for the article Globalization.

Culture of Asia

Culture of Asia has been requested to be renamed, see talk:Culture of Asia -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 05:23, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Cooperative WikiProject

WikiProject Globalization, with assistance from Outlines WikiProject, has drafted an Outline of globalization. We welcome your input, additions, and comments. Meclee (talk) 16:47, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject Culture at Wikimania 2014

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 09:31, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

npp for category tool

Please comment. Gryllida (talk) 23:32, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Four-paragraph leads -- a WP:RfC on the matter

Hello, everyone. There is a WP:RfC on whether or not the leads of articles should generally be no longer than four paragraphs (refer to WP:Manual of Style/Lead section for the current guideline). As this will affect Wikipedia on a wide scale, including WikiProjects that often deal with article formatting, if the proposed change is implemented, I invite you to the discussion; see here: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section#RFC on four paragraph lead. Flyer22 (talk) 17:19, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

The Arts

Not sure I should asses something without discussion, especially something so major, but "The Arts" seems like a pretty significant article. In fact, even Wikipedia tells me that it's "one of the supplemental core articles, which every encyclopedia should have.". However it's accessed completely and the page itself seems barely worked on for something so important. 66.233.55.19 (talk) 09:15, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Snow spray

Notable or not? Bearian (talk) 21:15, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Dual inheritance theory

Would dual inheritance theory be appropriate for this WikiProject? It's a theory on cultural evolution. EPM (talk) 23:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Missing article

Right now Culture clash is a dab page that doesn't discuss culture clash. Would someone be up to it? LeadSongDog come howl 21:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello!

Hi, guys! I just joined, and created this

Roman ruins and sculpture, PaniniThis user participates in
WikiProject Culture.

Use it if you like it! All best, i am founder of WikiProject Cultural Property of Great Importance, so i will help this project also trough mine! :) --Tadijataking 15:29, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Request for Comment at Talk:Judaism regarding the term "religion"

Please see the following request for comment. Talk:Judaism#Should_the_term_.22religion.22_appear_descriptively_in_the_first_sentence.3F. Input would be much appreciated.Griswaldo (talk) 04:10, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Assessment missing?

Any particular reason why Template:WikiProject Culture does not support assessment? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:48, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Culture.si

The wiki Culture.si was launched in April 2010. Texts about the culture of Slovenia are available under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license, the same license as used by Wikipedia. See Enhance Wikipedia! and Terms of Use. Published by the Slovenian Ministry of Culture and Ljudmila (media laboratory). --Eleassar my talk 13:49, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Freedom of speech = New WikiProject

Hi there, I'm notifying this WikiProject due to its relevance to Freedom of speech. I've recently gone ahead and created WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:

  1. List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech#Participants.
  2. Add userbox {{User Freedom of speech}} to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
  3. Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}.
  4. Join in discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
  5. Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.

Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 22:35, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Horrible Histories

Hi. We're having a discussion on the fate of Horrible Histories TV show at: Horrible Histories (2009 TV series)#Moving on. As a relevant Wikiproject, we would greatly appreciate it if you would voice your opinion on the talk page, or to have a crack at editing and improving it. Thankyou for your time. :)--Coin945 (talk) 13:22, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Culture Templates: Collapsible?

Hi! Is it possible to make this kind of Culture templates collapsible? Similar to this one. (| state = ) -- Thanks and cheers Horst-schlaemma (talk) 11:38, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

RfC United States same-sex marriage map

I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas?. Prcc27 (talk) 04:37, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride!

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!

  • What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
  • When? June 2015
  • How can you help?
    1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
    2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
    3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

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

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


Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

List of films featuring whitewashed roles listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of films featuring whitewashed roles to be moved to List of American films featuring white actors in non-white roles. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 08:30, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Cultural institution

Say, perhaps someone around here would like to reference and expand this pitiful stub? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:58, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

RFC, sacrade and tribal pole dances

It seems that, usually western concept of Pole dance tilts towards sensual aspects; the present first sentence of the article Pole dance goes something like, " Pole dance is a form of performance art, historically associated with strip clubs and night clubs,...." where as in rest of the world and in asia to be particular pole dancing is largely either sacred or associated with tribal culture or just a cultural activity.

Currently I have started working on article Pole worship, I would not prefer to include more than a consise section on sacrade pole dance in pole worship article for both reasons one is all pole dances are not necessaarilly sacrade secondly if we work on tribal and sacrade pole dances the section will outgrow very fast. The same would be case for pole dance article sections of tribal and sacrade dance will outgrow very fast. So wish members of this project would guide me how to go about.

Rgds

Mahitgar (talk) 08:46, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, we need eyes on Poles in mythology. - CorbieV☊☼ 15:33, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Poles in mythology listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Poles in mythology to be moved to foo. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 12:00, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Cultural appropriation

Dgpkb46 (talk) 16:49, 8 December 2015 (UTC)There is a section added about Responses against cultural appropriation and it should be checked for neutrality and expanded

WikiProject English Language

It's rather shocking that this project is missing, though its absence explains why we have so few articles about our language (most of the linguistic material on English is buried as sections, when we're lucky, in general linguistics articles), and why so much of what we do have is riddled with Victorian prescriptivist PoV-pushing and original research. Properly sourced, neutral, linguistically descriptive, detailed, encyclopedic coverage of the language is one of en.wp's most obvious topical gaps. The scope is general, including everything from the Great English Vowel Shift to Quotation marks in English to English as a global language, and various missing articles like major styles of English writing.

I've drafted the wikiproject outline at User:SMcCandlish/WikiProject English Language, including some "Goals" and "Scope" points. Please "pre-sign" as a participant so that it already has a number of supporters (7+ would be nice) when I take it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals in the next day or so. I've not yet created a to-do list for it or other resources (mainly so I don't have to move them later after the proposal goes through).

As far as I can determine, this project is missing because several times in the past, various camps of prescriptivists have tried to create something called "WikiProject English" to PoV-push their version of "correct" English on Wikipedia, and had it deleted at WP:MFD. This proposal would be the diametric opposite of such WP:FRINGE / WP:SOAPBOX campaigning.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  23:52, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of List of films featuring whitewashed roles for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of films featuring whitewashed roles is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films featuring whitewashed roles until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 14:26, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Archaeological record, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:10, 15 August 2016 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

Invitation to Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons


October 2016

Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons
Faciliated by Women in Red

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Ipigott (talk) 15:29, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Street food, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:08, 31 October 2016 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

Upcoming "420 collaboration"

You are invited to participate in the upcoming

"420 collaboration",

which is being held from Saturday, April 15 to Sunday, April 30, and especially on April 20, 2017!

The purpose of the collaboration, which is being organized by WikiProject Cannabis, is to create and improve cannabis-related content at Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects in a variety of fields, including: culture, health, hemp, history, medicine, politics, and religion.

WikiProject Culture participants may be particularly interested in the following category: Category:Cannabis culture.

For more information about this campaign, and to learn how you can help improve Wikipedia, please visit the "420 collaboration" page.

---Another Believer (Talk) 18:09, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

RfC on the WP:ANDOR guideline

Hi, all. Opinions are needed on the following: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RfC: Should the WP:ANDOR guideline be softened to begin with "Avoid unless" wording or similar?. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Citation overkill proposal at WP:Citation overkill talk page

Opinions are needed on the following: Wikipedia talk:Citation overkill#Citations. A permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:05, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

How to describe the Emmett Till case in the lead sentence of the Emmett Till article

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Talk:Emmett Till#RfC: Should we include the "accused of showing an interest in a white woman" aspect in the lead or specifically the lead sentence?. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 16:45, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

WP:Citation overkill RfC

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Citation overkill#Should this essay be changed to encourage more citations?. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:52, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

RfC regarding the WP:Lead guideline -- the first sentence

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section#Request for comment on parenthetical information in first sentence. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:20, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

RfC: Red links in infoboxes

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#RfC: Red links in infoboxes. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 13:40, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Jewish content at the Definitions of whiteness in the United States article

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Talk:Definitions of whiteness in the United States#Jewish material. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:42, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:34, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Merge discussion

This merge discussion may be of interest to the members of this project. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:23, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorolla Challenge

Hello. I would like to share with you that there is a writing challenge during November about the works of Joaquín Sorolla. You can participate in any language. The contest is organized by Wikimedia España and Museo Sorolla. The information about the project in at meta:Sorolla Challenge. Thanks. --Millars (talk) 23:10, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Request for Comment on Music (2021 film)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Music_(2021_film)#RfC_about_the_neutrality/balance_of_this_article,_and_which_type_of_English_to_use.? - A discussion on which form of english should be used, and also about the ongoing controversy surrounding the film 188.220.86.46 (talk) 20:08, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

FAR for Green children of Woolpit

I have nominated Green children of Woolpit for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 22:53, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Merge Orient into Eastern world

An editor has requested for Orient to be merged into Eastern world. Since you had some involvement with Orient or Eastern world, you might want to participate in the merger discussion (if you have not already done so). --Heanor (talk) 09:01, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

  • John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

AfD: Animals in LGBT culture

---Another Believer (Talk) 17:16, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

List of cultural icons

If that lists are regarded as WP:OR and often were unsourcered, why just some were deleted?--Dantetheperuvian (talk) 21:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Naming of articles in Category:Topics in culture: time for consistency?

There is a lot of similarly named articles about "Foo in culture" (as seen in Category:Topics in culture), but under somewhat different names, which i a problem per WP:CONSISTENT. TL;DR, hmmm, Cuckoo clock in culture (yes, that article currently exists) is the same as Cuckoo clock in popular culture, Cultural depictions of cuckoo clocks, Cuckoo clocks in fiction and so on.

Now, consider:

  1. "Foo in culture". Ex. Wikipedia in culture. Main cat: Category:Topics in culture
  2. "Foo in popular culture", ex. Bikini in popular culture. Main cat: Category:Topics in popular culture (a subcategory to Topics in culture)
  3. "Foo in human culture", although I think I've moved all of those to "in culture" a while ago (there is no such thing as non-human culture, isn't it?). Note that the phrase still persists in a bunch of section titles, ex. Cuckoo#In_human_culture). Oh, and there is an ongoing Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_May_20#Category:Animals_in_human_culture.
  4. "Foo in literature and culture", ex. Women warriors in literature and culture. I think this is the only article with this cumbersome title (literature is, obviously, part of culture), but again, this is more common in section titles, ex. Fop#In_literature_and_culture)
    Under those categories we find many articles, often in a list format that violates WP:IPC and as recent practice shows (see discussions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Popular culture), such lists are often deleted or rewritten into prose. Anyway, we have numerous similar articles under title variants such as:
  5. "Cultural depictions of Foo", ex. Cultural depictions of turtles. For whatever reasons, there is no Category:Cultural depictions, but there is Category:Cultural depictions of people (a subcat to Category:Topics in culture]] and Category:Depictions of people; there is no parent Category:Depictions either)
  6. "Cultural legacy of ", ex. Cultural legacy of the Titanic
  7. "Cultural references to Foo", ex. Cultural references to Hamlet
    1. "List of cultural references to Foo", ex. List of cultural references to A Clockwork Orange
    2. "List of references to Foo", ex. List of references to the Matterhorn
    3. "List of Foo references", ex. List of Wuthering Heights references
  8. "Foo in fiction", ex. Jupiter in fiction. Main cat: Category:Fiction by topic (it's a subcategory to "Topics in culture").
    1. "Foo in science fiction", ex. Earth in science fiction ia major subcategory here.
  9. "Foo in works of fiction", ex. Hypnosis in works of fiction
  10. "Foo in media", ex. Minced oaths in media
    1. "List of media portraying Foo", ex. List of media portraying drug smuggling
  11. "Foo in art and culture", ex. Star polygons in art and culture (related to another problematic category: Category:Classical antiquity in modern art and culture, there is parent category using those terms)
  12. "Foo in popular media", ex. Catsuits and bodysuits in popular media
    1. "Portrayals of Foo in popular media", ex. Portrayals of God in popular media
    2. "Foo in film and media", ex. Blenheim Palace in film and media (probably should be just "in media"...)
    3. "Foo in a particular type of media", ex. London in film
      1. "Portrayals of Foo in a particular type of media", ex. Portrayal of Arabs in film, Portrayal of women in American comics

It's quote possible I missed a few naming variants, please add them here if possible for our consideration.

I think this mess can be fixed, at least partially. Please note that while pop culture is a more narrow topic than culture, the line between "Foo in culture" and "Foo in popular culture" in our articles is very blurry. Wikipedia in culture article opens with "References to Wikipedia in popular culture...", while recently rewritten Battle of Thermopylae in popular culture starts with a section on 'Antiquity' discussing cultural references made to the battle as far as the BCE, arguably before the very concept of popculture even arose. Rainbows in culture is located in the "in popular culture" category. Other articles are likewise distributed throughout the various categories in a haphazard fashion; many entries are categorized both under "in culture/in popular culture" and "in fiction" category trees, again, with little consistency.

Now, having recently worked on Earth in science fiction and Venus in fiction (with Earth in fiction redirecting to the latter, and Venus in science fiction to the former, a minor concern to deal with later), I'll note that that those are more narrow treatments then Earth in culture and Venus in culture provide, although before my rewrites, they were just trivial list of works that mentioned those locations, and many articles, regardless of their name, are still just such trivial lists that likely need deletion (per WP:TNT, WP:IPC, WP:OR, etc.). But it would be good to come to an agreement on how to name such articles.

When topics get too detailed (ex. "Portrayals of Foo in a particular type of media"), I think it can be kept, but "Portrayals of" and like should be removed, ex. Portrayal of women in American comics should be renamed to just women in American comics, like London in media. While some of those articles are again just TV topic lists of films or whatever that a given theme appeared in, others are analytical, and we can leave them be for a while.

So, what can we do, practically? I think that we can dispose of the top level blurry distinctions ("in culture"="in popular culture" for start. As such, I'd proper to rename all articles named in the styles 1-7 (inc. 7-1 to 7-.3), 11 and 12 and 12-1 (but not 12-2, 12-3) to follow the main category ("Topics in culture"), so "in culture", per my point that "Foo in culture" encyclopedic entry and "Foo in popular culture", variously phrased, are in practice one and the ame. To not to bite off too much, I'd leave the 8-10 ("in fiction") for later, as that category is a mess that needs some separate cleanup (although IF we can reach consensus here, hopefully much of the entries there will be standardized as well, many are de facto "in culture"/"in popculture" too, but they need to reviwewd, as subcategories, on a one by one basis, and this post here is alraedy getting too long...).


Thoughts appreciated. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:04, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I am pinging numerous editors whom I recall to have offered comments in related discussion in the past few months. Please ping anyone else who may be interested, I'll also see if I can figure out how to list this at RfC. @Marcocapelle, LaundryPizza03, Reywas92, Daranios, TenPoundHammer, Rorshacma, Shooterwalker, SailingInABathTub, David Eppstein, TompaDompa, Sandstein, Johnbod, Jclemens, Historyday01, Spinningspark, BD2412, Randy Kryn, Uncle G, TTN, and Joe Roe: --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:24, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
PPS. I am having trouble figuring if this can be adapted into an RfC, by all means, if someone can start one on whether we should standardize the names, plaese do so. TIA. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:26, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
PPS. I encourage everyone to help with obvious cleanup need, such as simplifying weird titles like here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:38, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
A lot to think about here.I haven't added much to pages with "at popular culture" at the end, other than Librarians in popular culture. Under this proposal, this name would then need to be changed to something making it clear if is about fictional librarians rather than real-life librarians. Perhaps it could be something like Fictional librarians in media. There's probably a better name. If any pages with "portrayals of" need to be changed, that would have ripple effects on pages like Media portrayal of pansexuality, Media portrayal of asexuality, Media portrayal of LGBT people, Media portrayals of bisexuality, Media portrayals of transgender people so that they still convey the sane point. I remember creating a lot of those pages that way because I thought "Media portrayal"(s) made sense. The same could be said about pages ending with "in fiction", like Gay characters in fiction, Non-binary characters in fiction or Vegetarian characters in fiction. From time to time, I've thought of moving "Gay characters in fiction" to Media portrayal of homosexuality or Media portrayal of gay people and "Non-binary characters in fiction" to Media portrayal of non-binary people or something else, along with Vegetarian characters in fiction to a page name Media portrayal of vegetarians. But, I suppose the "in fiction" pages could be cleaned up too. Originally a lot of those LGBTQ-themed media portrayal pages did say "in fiction" but I moved them to "Media portrayal of..." because of Media portrayal of LGBT people page, believing that was the consensus at the time. I haven't heard about WP:IPC before (I have heard and know WP:OR and I think I've heard of WP:TNT), but I'll have to take a look at those "Media portrayal" pages I mentioned and apply the suggested guidance there to make them a bit more tight in the future.
Even as a person who has been actively editing on here, I continue to keep learning, and will admit that while the "media portrayal of" seems like it could work, page names can and should be changed if need be. As such, I look forward to what other people have to say on this topic. Historyday01 (talk) 18:14, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
@Historyday01 While I can see the topic of librarians in culture as encyclopedic, a quick glance at librarians in popular culture suggests that it uses the term popular culture IMHO incorrectly. It is, indeed, media portrayals of librarians, which logically seems like a subtopic of 'librarians in culture', which should also discuss librarian portrayal outside of mass media as well as their role in shaping culture. On that note, al the "media portrayal" articles, while possibly fine as sub articles, might need renaming to "mass media portrayals", since they don't cover non-mass media well if at all. Ex. from [1]: "In this study we considered two types of information sources: non-media (institutional and commercial brochures, travel agents and internet) and mass media information sources (advertising and reports in broadcast media)." Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Perhaps. I do think it falls into Media portrayals of librarians. I wasn't part of the original naming, so I've just edited it in its current form. The media portrayal pages could surely be renamed Mass media portrayals. I wouldn't oppose that. But I'll wait until this discussion concludes before I propose any renaming. There was already a combination of two pages about librarians in fiction, so now there's Libraries and librarians in fiction (a list) and Librarians in popular culture, so it might be the right time to at least propose a merger there, even if it isn't a successful proposal. Historyday01 (talk) 12:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
@Historyday01 I'll propose such a merge. Both articles suffer also from way too much OR/listing of examples without any analysis, sigh... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:05, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, I had been thinking of a merge, after the Libraries and librarians in fiction page was merged with another list, but I got busy with work, and just didn't have time to go through a merger. But, some of the articles I edit often definitely also suffer from listing of examples sometimes too, so I'll probably have to pare those down at some point. Historyday01 (talk) 16:33, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
  • I think that there is some logic to this. There will most probably be a group of articles within this area with different naming conventions that could be standardised but notability (where something is considered notable in secondary sources, specifically for its appearances in popular culture, or its cultural heritage, or depictions thereof) and WP:WORLDVIEW issues (who's culture? at what points in history?) will need to be considered. How will you handle Monkeys in Chinese culture, Monkeys in Japanese culture, Monkeys in fiction, Monkeys in mythology etc ... You could argue they should all be under Monkeys in culture but would that be useful to a reader? SailingInABathTub (talk) 23:09, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
    @SailingInABathTub To take that specific examples, sure, we need an overarching article on monkeys in culture (providing sourcing pans out). Now, Monkeys in mythology redirects to Monkey#Religion and worship while Monkeys in fiction to List of fictional primates, so as redirects, they don't require any action except maybe retargeting at some point. As for the Chinese and Japanese articles, they both seem lengthy enough and analytical enough they don't warrant any changes, I'll also note that they are not named monkeys in Chinese popular culture/monkeys in Japanese popular culture, despite being in Category:Monkeys in popular culture. IMHO this examples shows that many fixes are easy: said category needs renaming to Category:Monkeys in culture, and when main article is written, under monkeys in culture (not monkeys in popular culture), it should summarize the existing articles on Japanese and Chinese cultures (while the article Monkey needs a 'in culture' section that would direct reader to tha article, right now it has Monkey#Relationship_with_humans which to some degree is a start I guess. Anyway, your point about WORLDVIEW is quite relevant here, as trying to determine what is related to popculture seems much more tricky than determinin what is related to culture, also b/c uneven impact of different cultures on popculture.... Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
  • I could see how this makes sense, and I think the lowest hanging fruit would be standardizing the first 7 (popular culture) related lists. But there's always a risk in applying a one-size fits all solution, and we won't know until we try it out where we need to make adjustments. So I'm hesitant to recommend a specific approach right now. Something of this scope might be better attempted through the ordinary editing process. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:09, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
    @Shooterwalker What do you mean by ordinary editing process? We have hundreds if not thousands of nearly identical articles that don't have consistent names, and it's time to address this. Discussing it on their talks one by one doesn't seem ideal (most of said talk pages are mot monitored by active users). While WP:BOLD is a thing, and yes, I can just move more articles, when few days ago I was following BOLD and moved one article (tuberculosis in human culture to cultural depictions of tuberculosis), User:Chiswick Chap, it's primary author, was quite upset (although nobody has suggested a better title or moved the article back...). Anyway, that incident is one of the reasons I've decided to gauge the consensus of the community for applying WP:CONSISTENT. (Oh, and regarding that article, I guess per my refined argument, tuberculosis in culture would be the simplest best name, following Category:Topics in culture, which is after allnot named Category:Topics in human culture nor Category:Cultural depictions of topics...). PS. Looking at this move (which I don't see being discussed anywhere...), there's yet another type of articles, "Human interactions with Foo]], ex. Human interactions with microbes... (said move was from microbes in human culture, sigh). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:51, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
    There are limits to WP:CONSISTENT, and it's hard to gauge if that's because bad practices have crept in, or if it's because different articles should be treated differently. I'm sympathetic to finding a clean and standardized approach for this stuff, but my involvement thus far has been to evaluate the quality of sourcing in these articles, one by one. So I can't say definitively that hundreds of articles are congruent in scope. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:34, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Your starting point is wrong. These are very different articles, on very different subjects, and while some adjustments might be good, you are overworking WP:CONSISTENT here, as you tend to do with guidelines - what about concision? Plus you seem to be working your way through them, putting them up for Afd, so it is hard to get excited about some vast Rfc renaming them. I doubt there would be much support for this. Johnbod (talk) 03:38, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
    • Johnbod is correct, this is overworking the attempt at consistency, shoe-horning everything into one mould when the articles are of many different kinds. As for adding "depictions of [XYZ]" or "portrayals of" to hundreds of articles, what good would that do? It just makes the titles longer, when "XYZ in culture" says the same thing in fewer words: i.e. it's useless clutter. No thanks, we should be doing the opposite, or just leaving well alone. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:41, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
      If you'd take time to read Piotrus’s proposal, you'd see that it is exactly about simplifying overcomplicated to "XYZ in culture", at least that's my understanding of it. Am I right, User:Piotrus? - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:46, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
      Indeed. While recently I moved one article to "Cultural depictions of Foo", after considering the big picture further, I now support the simplistic "Foo in culture", which is also WP:CONSISTtent with Category:Topics in culture. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 20:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Just want to weigh in on one detail of this discussion: I prefer "Foo in culture" as compared to "Cultural depictions of foo". The latter may be slightly more accurated (depending on the case), but when I am looking for cultural depictions of foo, I am foremost interested in "Foo" rather than "Culture". So it just seems more natural, and more likely from a search point of view, to start the name with "Foo in ...". Daranios (talk) 19:01, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
  • I don't think there is a "one size fits all" solution to this. Sometimes (often?) the subtle (or not-so-subtle, as it may be) distinctions make a rather big difference. I'll explain with a few examples that I've personally been involved in writing.
    Immortality in fiction is about the concept of immortality in narrative fiction. One might expect Immortality in popular culture to also include e.g. poetry and songs that reference the concept. If the title were Immortality in culture, one would probably expect the article to (to perhaps even primarily) cover immortality in religious contexts.
    The title Moon in science fiction is a fib, of sorts. The topic is really Moon as a setting in fiction (or perhaps Moon as an astronomical location in fiction—a rather unwieldy title), as Moon in fiction might reasonably be expected to include the Moon as an object in the sky as in werewolf stories, for instance. Moon in popular culture might likewise be expected to cover e.g. songs referencing the Moon (literally and/or metaphorically) and paintings depicting the Moon, and Moon in culture would presumably also cover lunar calendars and lunar deities.
    What title to use really comes down to what the scope for the article should be, and there we have to defer to the sources—how do they cover the topic? There is room for improvement here; the argument that Battle of Thermopylae in popular culture should really be Battle of Thermopylae in culture is for instance not without merit, based on how the sources treat the topic (not that all the sources treat it the same way, mind you).
    I also think it's worth noting that "Foo" can be several different kinds of things. There are intangible concepts such as immortality (Immortality in fiction), locations such as London (London in fiction), historical events such as the Battle of Thermopylae (Battle of Thermopylae in popular culture), works of fiction such as Hamlet (Cultural references to Hamlet), and so on. Considerations might differ for different types of "Foo".
    The main problem is however not the titles but the content. Many of these articles are mere TV Tropes-style lists enumerating appearances of Foo in fiction/popular culture/whatever. What we want is of course analysis about Foo in fiction/popular culture/whatever that we find in reliable secondary/tertiary sources on the topic of Foo in fiction/popular culture/whatever (see MOS:POPCULT and the essay WP:CARGO). Adjusting the titles doesn't really address that part of the issue, but there might still be something to gain by standardising the titles somewhat. Getting rid of all the "List of..." titles would be a start (another variation with—as far as I can tell—only a single occurrence is "List of appearances of Foo in fiction": List of appearances of the Moon in fiction). Similarly, I'm really not a fan of "Cultural depictions of Foo" which pretty much implies "List of..." (i.e. "List of cultural depictions of Foo"). The same would be true of other variations that have a similar plural noun construction. The point above about starting the titles with "Foo in..." is one I agree with. TompaDompa (talk) 04:32, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
    @TompaDompa It's indeed a valid point that we can have several articles in this tree. "Foo in culture" is the widest. "Foo in popular culture" I dislike due to the difficulty of determining what is culture and what is popculture (antiquity references to Battle of Thermopylae are case in point there...) and I'd caution against having any such articles. "Foo in fiction"/"Fop in type of fiction", i.e. both "Earth in science fiction" and "Los Angeles in comics" and so on are reasonable subarticles (given sources exist). The big problem we have is that regardless of name used, many such artices are indeed just "mere TV Tropes-style lists enumerating appearances of Foo." We are slowly, very slowly tackling this with deletions/rewrites, but figuring out an overarching scheme and defining what should be in articles at its various levels would help a lot. As in, we could both describe and show examples of how articles about "Foo in culture"/"Foo in fiction" should look like. Using Good Articles as examples might be best. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Jews of Color

Please contribute to this new article draft on Jews of Color.--Coin945 (talk) 20:08, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:56, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

United States has an RFC

United States has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Shoreranger (talk) 14:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

RFD on British cultural Marxism

I posted an RFD for the term Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_May_17#British_cultural_Marxism. Please visit and chime in on your thoughts. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:47, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Credibility bot

As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej (talk) 17:37, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Culture by country categorisation

You're invited to participate at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 August 21#Fooian culture to Culture of Fooland part 2. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:41, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Oscar Allain#Requested move 6 September 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Oscar Allain#Requested move 6 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 10:30, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that The arts, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 2 October 2023 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Power (social and political), which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 23 October 2023 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Requested input on Talk:Shipping (fandom)

There's a discussion on Talk:Shipping (fandom) about whether (or not) to add a section about antis/anti-shippers to the article. Your input would be appreciated. Historyday01 (talk) 17:22, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Culture/Archive_1&oldid=1214166444"