Template talk:WikiProject Western Australian Wheatbelt

Decisions
Yet to be decided: - Evad37 &#91;talk] 10:23, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Are assessments needed - Quality? Importance?
 * Include subprojects and/or topics in banner?
 * If so, what structure? Single level (i.e. Wheatbelt→Clackline, Wheatbelt→Railways) or multiple levels (i.e. Wheatbelt→Shire of Northam→Clackline, Wheatbelt→Transport→Railways) or something else?
 * What are the current sub-projects/targets, and should others be created?
 * Banner message? (currently using default message)
 * Have a separate banner, or integrate into ?

thought on the project


 * Tags on all wheatbelt related items first
 * Australia/Western Australia is the project setup
 * No separate project/assessment until such time that numbers of items are relative to the WA project have been considered
 * at which time a separate project/task force is possible to be created with assessment


 * where toodyay/clackline and other country towns come online as good collections of material - they remain wa project first
 * only when wheatbelt becomes a separate assessment entity due to size or complexity - the wheatbelt wikitowns/entities are sub sections of the wheatbelt project


 * simplicity - everything western australia project only first (10,000 arts - or whatever a nominatable size seems a reasonable critical mass)
 * size/complexity arises - assessable sub project of western australia

in this way if the project falls over or editors - the wheatbelt tag is still legit regardless of outcome


 * banner as is, still western australia in the australian


 * flat as possible in levels - so that it still contributes to and belongs tothe australian/western australian projects

the message to readers and editors is consistently - this ia a project in process - with the possibility of more eds or content, but as is
 * until we get to a point where all stubs and articles related to wheatbelt are tagged with wheatbelt banner - and an overview and a count is done,


 * after that point the project can be viewed at a consolidation of articles and subjects that relate to the subject


 * where the process evolves after that - and a project evolves - then/when that happens with unsanswered questions above can be resolved then.

satusuro 11:56, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

"the Western Australian Wheatbelt Project / Railways"
the word the in PROJECT_NAME adds that word to the title/top line of the box (e.g. on Talk:Wheatbelt railway lines of Western Australia), where is is probably redundant. However removing it leaves us with the seemingly ungrammatical "This article is within the scope of Western Australian Wheatbelt Project" (ungrammatical because Western Australian Wheatbelt Project is a weak proper name) in the main text of that box. Perhaps "Western Australian Wheatbelt Project" really needs to be WikiProject:Western Australian Wheatbelt (a strong proper name). Mitch Ames (talk) 09:14, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Using the standard convention for the page title would make everything easier. The components/topics should probably also be proper subpages. i.e.
 * Western Australian Wheatbelt Project → WikiProject Western Australian Wheatbelt
 * Western Australian Wheatbelt Project - Railways → WikiProject Western Australian Wheatbelt/Railways
 * and similarly for any new components
 * (The pages themselves could still refer to "Western Australian Wheatbelt Project", like how WP:USRD refers to itself as "The U.S. Roads WikiProject", even though it has a standard page title WikiProject U.S. Roads) - Evad37 &#91;talk] 11:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)


 * excellent point - I agree with Evad's suggestions - Mitch, you agree ? JarrahTree 11:32, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. This is why we gave him the mop - to clean up (y) our mess. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:48, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ - Evad37 &#91;talk] 12:17, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)