Wikipedia:Collaboration of the week/Removed/2005/Archive 4

The following failed the COTW between Feb 28 and March 28 2005

Geography of Mexico (6 votes in 2 weeks)

 * Nominated March 4, 2005; needs 10 votes by March 18, 2005

Support:
 * 1) Circeus 15:43, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) CunningLinguist 03:15, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Warofdreams 14:31, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) jacobolus (t)  21:32, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Dmcdevit 06:03, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) D AVODD   22:02, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * There is more detail at Mexico! I can't believe we couldn't build a full-fledged article of the geography of the larged country of central america... Circeus 15:43, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed -CunningLinguist 03:15, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd be willing to work on some maps jacobolus (t)  21:32, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Women's football (soccer) (1 vote in 1 week)

 * Nominated 10 March 2005; needs 5 votes by 17 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) A.K.A.47 20:33, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * This is a major sport in a number of countries, but it is poorly covered - we need to start building a series of articles to rival what exists for the men's game, and it should start here. A.K.A.47 20:33, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Too far from a stub to have a chance. Try out at Article Improvement Drive Circeus 20:50, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * As a fan of women's soccer since the 1991 WWC, I'm all for it; on the other hand, I'm not sufficiently familiar with the norms of CotW to know where this article fits within them. --Ray Radlein 00:43, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Not a stub. This article is not eligible. (Ray, you can read the rules at the top; they aren't long.) --Dhartung | Talk 07:19, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

History of Latin America (3 votes in 1 week)

 * Nominated 11 March 2005; needs 5 votes by 18 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) jacobolus  (t)  21:25, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Junes 09:24, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Hippalus 19:46, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

Comments
 * The lack of articles about the history of Latin America is a gaping hole for wikipedia, in my view jacobolus (t)  21:25, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't think you can nominate them as a block. I suggest you either choose one or nominate them seperately. Junes 22:31, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Nomination changed to Latin America only, therefore support. Junes 09:24, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * The Central America article is not a stub, therefore not eligible. Of the two remaining, I would prefer to consider Latin America as a whole. Renominate that one alone, please. --Dhartung | Talk 07:20, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Richard C. Hoagland (5 votes in 2 weeks)

 * Nominated March 4, 2005; needs 10 votes by March 18, 2005

Support:
 * 1)  R yan!  |  Talk  21:11, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Da 'Sco Mon 03:06, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) CunningLinguist 03:15, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Bratsche (talk)  19:09, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Daniel11 20:24, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * An HIGHLY influential man on whom there is much to be written about! -CunningLinguist 03:15, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * True, and POV issues need to be cleared up. -- R yan!  |  Talk  11:50, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Concur with CunningLinguist. Bratsche (talk) 19:09, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

Mystery film (2 votes in one week)

 * Nominated 9 March 2005; needs 5 votes by 16 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) RJH 23:27, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) &rarr;mathx314(talk)(email) 23:13, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * This could be a fun page. Right now its a sad sub-stub article on a historically very popular film genre. (Compare, for example, to the pages for Western movie, Action movie, Science fiction film, &c.)

Philippine Revolution (2 votes in one week)

 * Nominated 9 March 2005; needs 5 votes by 16 March 2005

Support: Comments:
 * 1) O
 * 2) D AVODD   21:58, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Ogaden War (2 votes in one week)

 * Nominated 8 March 2005; needs 5 votes by 15 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) KNewman 23:35, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2)   Banyan Tree  21:33, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * There's no article on this armed conflict between Ethiopia and Somalia. It was one of those proxy wars between the USA and Soviet Union. This article is a must.

Cenepa War (1 vote in 1 week)

 * Nominated March 6; needs 5 votes by March 13

Support:
 * 1) Neutralitytalk 19:05, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Comments:

Far Eastern University (1 vote in 1 week)

 * Nominated 6 March 2005; needs 5 votes by 13 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) O

Comments:
 * Isn't there a Far Eastern University in Russia, as well? I could be wrong, though. KNewman 05:38, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Gentlemen's club (3 votes in 1 week)

 * Nominated March 3, 2005; needs 5 votes by March 10, 2005

Support:
 * 1) Grunners 17:09, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) CunningLinguist 03:20, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Theo  (Talk) 16:35, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * An important social and historical institution, the place where the social elite met and made deals in smoke-filled back rooms, deserves at least a short article. Grunners 17:09, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * A key problem is that the phrase means strip club in the US. --Dhartung | Talk 10:29, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, it has come to mean that in the U.S., ever since the decline of real gentlemans clubs. There are several issues that could certainly be of interest here: famous gentlemans clubs, the concept of the "old boys network", discriminatory membership on the basis of race, ethnicity, class, sex. thames 14:47, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * An of course, their decline and evolution into strip clubs. Support -CunningLinguist 03:15, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I said a key problem. It was an FYI. --Dhartung | Talk 23:19, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * The article title should be Gentlemen's club or Gentleman's club (purely on grammatic grounds). It is my understanding that London clubs are gentlem e n's clubs. Is gentlem a n's club a US coining? --Theo (Talk) 16:35, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I put some stats on the talk page. men's beats man's worldwide (& the first google for the latter is in New Zealand!), but they actually run neck-and-neck in the UK. --Dhartung | Talk 23:19, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Note the extensive discussion at Club (organization)

The Old Man and the Sea (5 votes in 2 weeks)

 * Nominated February 23, 2005; needs 10 votes by March 9, 2005

Support:
 * 1) DanielNuyu 06:39, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) SmarterChild2 19:40, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) flamurai (t) 04:17, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) wiccanhot 01:23, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Pmeisel 23:45, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * I think this is an important novel by an important author. We should at least bring it to a status less deplorable than the current. --DanielNuyu 06:39, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Academic dishonesty (8 votes in 2 weeks)

 * Nominated February 15, 2005; needs 10 votes by March 1, 2005

Support:
 * 1) Neutralitytalk 06:20, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) brian0918  &#153;  13:52, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) AllyUnion (talk) 14:02, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) AnyFile 14:06, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) ExplorerCDT 21:08, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) J3ff 10:57, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) – flamurai (t) 04:19, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC) (prefer Academic integrity)
 * 8) wiccanhot 23:09, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * I've got a lot of experience in this blossoming field. :) Shouldn't this also include data manipulation? -- brian0918 &#153;  13:52, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't a larger, more broad article be at Academic integrity as it's not just dishonesty or plagiarism that is at issue. &mdash;ExplorerCDT 21:08, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Seconded. Academic integrity is a much better title. It will also be better suited to bringing in issues of falsified research, faked resumes, and other aspects, as well as processes being used to mitigate the problem. --Dhartung | Talk 21:13, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good idea. I wonder if something like the Social Text affair should somehow be included, or the whole idea of a peer-reviewed journal with nonsensical articles. -- brian0918  &#153;  21:20, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * Not enough votes. -- BRIAN 0918   13:50, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Estate in land (3 votes in 1 week)

 * Nominated February 25, 2005; needs 5 votes by March 4, 2005

Support:
 * 1) KNewman 03:46, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) SmarterChild2 19:40, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) wiccanhot 02:55, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * I bumped into this one while looking for an article on Landownership. We should either expand the one I would like to nominate, or write the second one from scratch. It is an important historical and legal concept.

Reason for removal:
 * Not enough votes. -- BRIAN 0918  15:51, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Home (4 votes in 1 week)

 * Nominated February 25, 2005; needs 5 votes by March 4, 2005

Support:
 * 1) violet/riga (t) 23:12, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) CunningLinguist 23:47, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Djadek 00:09, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) wiccanhot 01:27, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * Currently a simple redirect to house, but the difference between house and home is immense. The many cultural references alone would make it a worthwhile candidate.
 * Not sure how much there is to write about, but interesting idea nonetheless. -CunningLinguist 23:47, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * Not enough votes. -- BRIAN 0918  15:51, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Crime scene (4 votes in 1 week)

 * Nominated February 28, 2005; needs 5 votes by March 7, 2005

Support:
 * 1) Neutralitytalk 00:01, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) brian0918&#153; 13:51, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) 500LL 14:51, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) wiccanhot 02:59, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * Linked to from 10+ articles. Neutralitytalk 00:01, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * Not enough votes. --AndyL 03:19, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

History of sculpture (2 votes in 1 week)

 * Nominated February 28, 2005; needs 5 votes by March 7, 2005

Support:
 * 1) Djadek 00:11, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) wiccanhot 03:00, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * I can't believe an article dealing with such a prominent part of art history is so short - I really think it can and should be expanded... Djadek 00:11, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Not a stub. Also, much longer than History of art. --brian0918&#153; 06:35, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Certainly incomplete, ethough (barely anything after renaissance!). Make a heads up at Article Improvement Drive and WikiProject Visual arts Circeus 15:10, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * Not enough votes. --AndyL 03:19, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Psycholinguistics (8 votes in 2 weeks)

 * Nominated February 25, 2005; needs 10 votes by March 11, 2005

Support:
 * 1) Junes 17:45, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) SmarterChild2 19:40, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) wiccanhot 23:14, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Lockeownzj00 04:14, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) CunningLinguist 23:47, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Hippalus 07:38, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Heida Maria 21:34, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Sobelk 01:57, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * An important discipline of psychology. The article has some info but it should have much more, for instance on the various steps of language perception and production (such as speech perception, spoken word recognition, syntactic processing, discourse comprehension, discourse planning, grammatical encoding, phonological encoding, speech production). Junes 17:45, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * As a cunning linguist myself (the term; not the wikipedia user ;) and a linguophile, i must support this. Lockeownzj00 04:14, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Same here ;) -CunningLinguist 23:47, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * In a course on this at the moment, would be able to edit. Sobelk 01:57, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't this nomination be removed since it had only 8 votes for 14 days. 500LL 20:07, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * Not enough votes. --kaal 01:38, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Heavy industry (4 votes in 1 week)

 * Nominated March 4, 2005; needs 5 votes by March 11, 2005

Support:
 * 1) KNewman 17:23, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Eleassar777 23:42, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 20:44, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) olivier 08:50, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * There's a paragraph on heavy industry in the Industry article. I believe it deserves more than that. If this one goes OK, we should probably nominate Light industry next.

Reason for removal:
 * Not enough votes. --kaal 01:41, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ancient Mesopotamia (14 votes in 21 days)

 * Nominated February 20, 2005; needs 15 votes by March 13, 2005

Support:
 * 1) Dmcdevit 05:14, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) brian0918  &#153;  05:22, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) CunningLinguist 09:23, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) AndyL 15:30, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) kaal 08:04, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Devari 14:55, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Junes 17:28, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) SmarterChild2 19:40, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Eleassar777 12:40, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) wiccanhot 01:21, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Pharos 10:01, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:38, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Fredrik | talk 06:54, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) olivier 08:45, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * This article is terribly inadequate. Mesopotamia is the home of the earliest civilization and where the first writing, cuneiform was developed. It has been a center of culture and influence since then (and is still quite a global newsmaker today). Before you start to wonder to yourself whether this is just about Ancient Mesopotamia or just the region Mesopotamia, if you were to click on those links you would see they are both redirects to the same Mesopotamia page. I don't know how that should be dealt with, but my impression is that the word generally refers to the ancient civilization. --Dmcdevit 05:14, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I strongly suggest that the article be at Ancient Mesopotamia as "Mesopotamia" is still a geographical term of some use refering to the fertile land between the Tigris and the Euphrates.--Pharos 08:08, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree, but first let's make sure everyone that voted wanted Ancient Mesopotamia.--Dmcdevit 16:56, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. -- brian0918 &#153;  19:03, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I've created a page at Ancient Mesopotamia, although it is currently blank (and begging to be filled). I am therefore deleting "Mesopotamia" from the nomination and leaving it at "Ancient Mesopotamia." I hope I haven't overstepped my bounds.--Dmcdevit 03:32, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Um... There seems to be some controversy about the move. See the talk page at Talk:Ancient_Mesopotamia and let's get this settled.
 * There seems to be a lot of Mesopotamia-related articles, but no real good summary page. Great idea! --Devari 14:55, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * The new Ancient Mesopotamia page has been changed back to a redirect. I guess it's okay if it stays that way until (and if) it becomes a COTW, or at least someone begins to edit it, as a redirect is better than a blank page, so I'm leaving it as is. --Dmcdevit 00:48, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * Not enough votes. --Wonderfool (talk) (contribs) (email) 09:33, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Mali (18 votes in 28 days)

 * Nominated February 17, 2005; needs 20 votes by March 17, 2005

Support:
 * 1)  brian0918  &#153;  17:54, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2)  XED . talk  18:05, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Pharos 18:46, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Dmcdevit 22:10, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) CunningLinguist 23:15, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) ALoan (Talk) 12:27, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Warofdreams 13:01, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) AndyL 15:30, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Leyanese 15:33, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Mondhir 03:08, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) SmarterChild2 19:40, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Djadek 00:07, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) wiccanhot 01:20, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Darwinek 17:12, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Circeus 04:35, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) Lockeownzj00 20:14, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 17) Gareth Hughes 23:13, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 18) Eleassar777 11:21, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * Only ~1500 characters, with a population of ~12 million (twice that of Burundi; compare to Belgium with 10 million). -- brian0918 &#153;  17:54, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The subarticles are quite large though - if uninspiring to look at and in need of sumarisation - Estel (talk) 12:31, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * For future reference, a few minutes research shows Cameroon, Central African Republic, Ethiopia, Guinea, Morocco, Western Sahara, Tunisia, Dominica, French Guyana, Maldives, Qatar, etc. are all horribly stubbish. --Dmcdevit 23:14, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * We should eventually conquer them all. Lockeownzj00 20:14, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes

Godzilla (1998 film) (1 vote in 7 days)

 * Nominated 10 March 2005; needs 5 votes by 17 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) O 06:30, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes

Sacred geometry (3 votes in 7 days)

 * Nominated 12 March 2005; needs 5 votes by 19 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) gren 22:39, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) CunningLinguist 01:13, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) rydia 04:23, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments
 * This is a very important concept which has been incorporated greatly into religious architecture and would definitely be an interesting article to expand. gren 22:39, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes

Music theory (9 votes in 14 days)

 * Nominated 6 March 2005; needs 10 votes by 20 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) Lockeownzj00 03:34, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Gareth Hughes 20:02, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) nikhil 14:16, 2005 Mar 10 (UTC)
 * 4) Hyacinth 19:41, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) RSpeer 21:58, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Shauri 20:26, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) WB 00:54, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Ganymead 22:59, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) KingTT 17:22, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * Music theory and Guitar chord most certainly need work from those knowledgable on the subject. Let's get some nice technical stuff here. I'll help, but I'm not good on specific details. Lockeownzj00 03:34, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * This is not a stub, but is a rather bedraggled set of headings that certainly needs work. It is rather based on Western classical theory, and so needs a good bit of international breadth given to it. Gareth Hughes 20:02, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Looks like it needs some work done. Also, like I have noted in Guitar chord, guitar chord also needs a lot of work. Maybe merge with power chord?
 * No, a power chord is a very specific thing that is only part of what 'guitar chord' encompasses. Lockeownzj00 03:21, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, just small inclusion in the guitar chord section would be nice. and now it's done. Which is nice! WB 01:16, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes

Culture of Poland (6 votes in 14 days)

 * Nominated 6 March 2005; needs 10 votes by 20 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:40, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Dmcdevit 23:47, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Circeus 23:52, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) --Wonderfool (talk) (contribs) (email) 12:47, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Przepla 11:43, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Ganymead 23:06, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * A major country and not even a stub on its culture. The best there is a small list at Poland. Shame. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:40, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Great idea, I'd like to believe that eventually every culture will have an article! --Dmcdevit 23:47, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, some type of articles articles are standard subarticles, and all countries are (or are expected to have) "History of xxx", "geography of xxx" and "Culture of xxx", amongst others.
 * True, but the idea of a subarticle is that it is a subarticle, that is, it is less than a complete and comprehensive article, only an introduction. No subarticle is truly stand-alone.--Dmcdevit 04:45, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I was refering to articles linked as "main article : xxx" from country article. "culture of xxx" is one of these standard articles. Circeus 17:45, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * How perfect. I'm in love with a Polish girl. With this culture page, I can seduce her with my knowledge of Poland. Aah, Wiki entering into my personal life!--Wonderfool (talk) (contribs) (email) 12:47, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Indeed. At least such page would be a list of Poland related cultural phenonema like Studniówka, Two-fingers salute, and a starting point for creating Wigilia, Polish square hat Przepla 11:43, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes

Piranha (4 votes in 7 days)

 * Nominated 14 March 2005; needs 5 votes by 21 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:07, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) 500LL 20:23, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) KingTT 20:25, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Mgm|(talk) 11:04, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * I can't believe that the most deadly fish article is nothing but a stub! Note: don't be fooled by a nice pic and bio-template, the actual content is just a few lines! The Mowag Piranha AFV article is larger then this, for pity's sake...--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:07, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes kaal 18:54, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Type design (7 votes in 14 days)

 * Nominated 9 March 2005; needs 10 votes by 23 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) Circeus 16:41, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) 500LL 20:29, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) jacobolus  (t)  21:28, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Dhartung | Talk 07:14, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Junes 18:06, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) AnyFile 15:13, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Melaen 22:37, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * A major area of graphic design, particularly with the advent of informatics in the field and the explosion of free fonts and their spreading on the Internet. Lots to be written.
 * A stub? You're kidding me. I guess the utilitarian design of Wikipedia scares "type" types away from here. ;-) --Dhartung | Talk 07:14, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes kaal 18:54, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

History of warfare (9 votes in 14 days)

 * Nominated 9 March 2005; needs 10 votes by 23 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) Dmcdevit 22:36, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) kaal 03:50, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:07, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Dhartung | Talk 07:15, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Shauri 20:26, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Eleassar777 21:04, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) ChewyLSB 00:08, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) WizardOfTheCDrive 01:18, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Daniel11 08:18, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * An enormous area of history with impact on the culture, politics, religion, daily life, etc. of people everywhere. This would make a great COTW, needs a broad, comprehensive overview; it's in a sad state right now. --Dmcdevit 22:36, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * We seem to be cotwing quite a lot of Histories of... This seems like another interesting one :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:07, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes kaal 18:57, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

History of art (16 votes in 28 days)

 * Nominated February 25, 2005; needs 20 votes by March 25, 2005

Support:
 * 1) Dmcdevit 04:33, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) SmarterChild2 19:40, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) 119 04:20, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Eleassar777 12:42, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) wiccanhot 23:15, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Antandrus 00:41, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Lockeownzj00 04:13, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) brian0918&#153;
 * 9) nikhil 01:10, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Darwinek 17:18, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 12:42, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) olivier 08:48, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) D AVODD   22:05, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) WB 01:07, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Ganymead 23:04, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) Melaen 22:37, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * I think this article is, along the lines of the histories of music, science, etc., a very deserving article. These broad history articles are very accessible to the COTW, with lots of potential, and, above all, important. This article, aside from being a necessary general topic, serves to introduce the entire art history series (see Template:Art history series) so it would be kind of sad if it remained at a paragraph long. --Dmcdevit 04:33, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * History of Art is currently a redirect. The main article should be "history of," for grammatic fluidity and for a semi-ubiquitous naming system. Lockeownzj00 04:15, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Done and done. -- brian0918 &#153;  04:28, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I would assume this field has the same grammatic structure as music did (i.e. music history vs. history of music), in which case we want "history of art" as you've changed it.--Dmcdevit 00:05, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with Dmcdevit that it should be an article that should be more developed, etc. -- WB 01:07, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * not enough votes kaal 04:00, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Interwar period (15 votes in 28 days)

 * Nominated February 27, 2005; needs 20 votes by March 27, 2005

Support:
 * 1) thames 04:12, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) SimonP 23:43, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) CunningLinguist 23:47, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Neutralitytalk 00:02, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) wiccanhot 01:24, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 13:32, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Eleassar777 13:00, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Dhartung | Talk 21:03, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Darwinek 17:15, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Hippalus 17:43, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Juppiter 02:46, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) A.K.A.47 20:21, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Shauri 20:26, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Den fjättrade ankan 20:45, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Dmn / &#1332;&#1396;&#1398; 01:16, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * That we have such detailed pages on other WWI/WWII-related topics, and leave the interwar period in a state like this does not make any sense. The interwar period featured the rise of isolationism, economic autarky, extreme right and socialist movements throughout Europe, global depression, the roaring twenties, the expat poets and authors, the bauhaus school, dada, the second-wave of futurism, the rapid meiji growth, the bolsheviks' consolidation of power, etc.  I could go on.  We have a wealth of information on these topics, so it should be trivial to assemble it all on the interwar period article, and draw some larger themes out of it all. &mdash;thames 04:12, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Although it is fairly ambitious - part of a history of the world series, aka history of the world (1918-1939). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 13:32, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * "Interwar period"? You might mean between World War I and World War II, but surely that could refer to any period between two wars.  Presumably there is a substantial overlap with the articles on the 1920s and 1930s, and other history articles dealing with those decades... -- ALoan (Talk) 13:42, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I suppose you're right, in a sense. However, in common usage, "the interwar period" almost always refers to the period between WWI and WWII.  I think it's a legitimate article to write, but we should include an explanation of your concern in the intro paragraph to make everything clear.  As far as other articles that cover this period, if there is an article which we could simply redirect to, that would be fine by me, but I'm not sure that any articles address the global trends during this timeperiod&mdash;most would be specific to just one country.  In general I think this article will end up being a collection of previously written material, with many see also: or main article: links throughout.  But an overview pointing to the larger trends in this period is certainly called for given the diversity of cultural and political events that arose during this period. &mdash;thames 15:36, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * It's true that the word has a general meaning, but given the importance of the two World Wars, it has long been used to refer to this particular period. Compare antebellum and postbellum, which in the US are primarily used to refer to the periods before and after the Civil War. --Dhartung | Talk 21:03, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * Part of my history course is 'International History 1919-1939', which chart Versailles, the early Weimar Republic, Axis Aggression, The League of Nations through to WW2, so I could help here - and I respect the fact that there is a lot of detail here which is very useful when covered in terms of a transition between the two wars.
 * not enough votesAndyL 18:02, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sahara (16 votes in 28 days)

 * Nominated February 27, 2005; needs 20 votes by March 27, 2005

Support:
 * 1) Beland 05:16, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Gareth Hughes 13:34, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Antandrus 18:49, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 4)  &mdash; mark &#9998; 23:38, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) CunningLinguist 23:47, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Djadek 00:10, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Warofdreams 15:21, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) wiccanhot 02:58, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Darwinek 07:00, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) 500LL 20:31, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 11)  Banyan Tree  21:33, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Phlebas 21:50, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Ganymead 23:03, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Dmcdevit 23:44, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) AndyL 19:22, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) gren 20:08, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * Moved here from Requests for Expansion, where this article has sat for a year. It does seem like such a big region of the world should have a more substantial article. -- Beland 05:16, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * An excellent choice for collaboration as material for this is readily accessible, there are a huge historical, geographical, anthropological and linguistic connexions that can be made here. If this becomes a COTW, I'll buy a round of ice-cold ones in Alex when we're done! Gareth Hughes 13:34, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * What they said.  &mdash; mark &#9998; 23:38, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Just curious whether the subject is covered more completely in a related article. --Dhartung | Talk 06:37, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Normally I would vote for this, but the article isn't really a stub. Perhaps this would make a better candidate for the new Article improvement drive.--Pharos 15:49, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed, and I usually call out non-stub nominees. Vote withdrawn. --Dhartung | Talk 09:51, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes-- AndyL 18:02, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

History of history (1 vote in 1 week)

 * Nominated 19 March 2005; needs 5 votes by 26 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) O 23:08, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * Well, I agree that the article needs work, but it could just as easily be a viable VfD candidate. The article as it stands doesn't really establish an overall definition or direction.  After reading it, it's still hard to tell exactly what the broader meaning of the history of history is.  I'm not sure how we can collaborate on the article when it's unclear what the article is actually supposed to be.   &mdash;thames 23:39, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a good idea, but I don't understand the scope of this article at all. By it's own defintion, it should really be called "History of recorded human history in the West." In fact, it sounds more like a history of the West, and not a history of history. Whoever created this article doesn't really understand what the article entails, it should not look at any true historical events, but it should examine the events, trends, changes, etc., in the field of history as an academic subject. I would love to support this if it were clarified and on topic.--Dmcdevit 23:58, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * It's called Historiography, and that article is well developed. This should be nominated at vfd, not cotw. --Tothebarricades.tk 00:28, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Not quite, historiography is the theory of history, the way it is written, interpretted, etc.; does not refer to any past events as such. But, presumably, a history of history should trace the past events in the field of history(new innovations, trends, etc.), not just theory. It's a valid idea, just a completely misguided article currently.--Dmcdevit 04:52, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * In any case "HofH" is a valid subfield of historiography. Mikkalai 22:36, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * History of historiography, then. lol Circeus 04:21, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Check out its history page if you want the joke to continue
 * It is not a joke! (even if it was an intention). Google gices cca. 13,000 hits to the term. Many of them are invalid, of course, but there are even books with this title. Mikkalai 22:36, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I gave up on caring about this article a while ago, but give it a shot by all means.--Dmcdevit 22:55, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes-- AndyL 18:02, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Religious architecture (14 votes in 3 weeks)

 * Nominated 5 March 2005; needs 15 votes by 26 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) Circeus 04:43, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Lockeownzj00 06:02, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Pharos 06:07, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Hippalus 07:25, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Eleassar777 13:57, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Gareth Hughes 14:46, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Warofdreams 13:07, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Junes 13:54, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) gren 01:09, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 10)   Banyan Tree  21:33, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) olivier 08:51, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Neutralitytalk 02:38, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Jacoplane 04:29, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Ganymead 23:16, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments:
 * oddly, no article exist on the architecture specific to buildings of worship. An interesting article that would cover the basics of traditional (and maybe modern?) considerationn of temple buildings across religions. Circeus 04:43, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * that is odd, considering how prominent an effect it had on essentially every culture in the world. not just temples, but the general architecture of a region was most certainly affected by the religious architecture of the region. Lockeownzj00 06:02, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * A fascinating topic, with more interconnections than most would realize; for example the basilica plan was originally used for Roman government buildings.--Pharos 06:07, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * A very important and extensive topic, because of its enormous effect on history, art, science and other aspects of culture. --Eleassar777 13:57, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes-- AndyL 18:02, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Arabic literature (12 votes in 3 weeks)

 * Nominated 7 March 2005; needs 15 votes by 28 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) 500LL 18:15, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Gareth Hughes 20:10, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Hippalus 08:29, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Darwinek 07:02, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Junes 13:57, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) gren 01:13, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Ganymead 23:05, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Dmcdevit 05:38, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Nick Catalano 04:37, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Melaen 22:37, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Missmarple 21:54 Mar 2005 (CET)
 * 12) Tothebarricades.tk 06:32, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Comments: Reason for removal:
 * It's a shame that such a deep and important civilisation has only few informations and stubs about its litterature.
 * This has been Literature collaboration of the fortnight (I'm not sure that that had much effect), but it would be good to give a wider audience. I've been doing a bit of extra reading around the subject, so I'll work on it anyway. Gareth Hughes 20:10, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I nominated it for the Literature collaboration of the week, and it won it, but like you said, that didn't had much effect. 500LL 22:22, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * not enough votes--Wonderfool t(c)e) 10:08, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Congo Basin (14 votes in 3 weeks)

 * Nominated 7 March 2005; needs 15 votes by 28 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) Gareth Hughes 21:13, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Dmcdevit 23:03, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) --Melaen 09:21, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Warofdreams 13:10, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Circeus 17:39, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Darwinek 07:03, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Junes 13:55, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) D AVODD   22:01, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Mondhir 02:18, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Raintaster 05:09, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Phlebas 22:17, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Melaen 22:37, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) --Pmeisel 12:51, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Missmarple 21:54 Mar 2005 (CET)

Comments:
 * This is the world's second largest rainforest (after the Amazon Rainforest); there are articles on Congo River and Congo, but this one is absent.
 * It would be better to call this page Central African rainforest (636 hits) or Congo rainforest (4.610 hits). Phlebas 22:33, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I find 51,800 hits for "Congo Basin" --Dmcdevit 01:30, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * OK you got me ;). But my opinion is that Amazon Basin should be merged with Amazon Rainforest (and with Amazon River). Amazon Basin (together with Amazon River Basin) should be a redirect to Amazon River. Same applies to Congo Rainforest. Take a look at Talk:Amazon_Basin. &mdash; Phlebas 16:43, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Why is there no difference? Shouldn't Amazon River refer to the body of water itself, while Amazon Basin should encompass the entire geographic area drained by the river, and Amazon Rainforest should refer specifically to the forest and its geography/ecosystem/rainforesty stuff? Same for Congo.--Dmcdevit 00:37, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Reason for removal:
 * not enough votes--Wonderfool t(c)e) 10:08, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Salt route (7 votes in 2 weeks)

 * Nominated 14 March 2005; needs 10 votes by 28 March 2005

Support:
 * 1) Eleassar777 14:18, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Junes 18:11, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Dmcdevit 21:58, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:24, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) AnyFile 14:49, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Melaen 22:37, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Missmarple 21:54 Mar 2005 (CET)

Comments Salt was very precious in the past and heavily influenced human history. Wars were fought over it, states were formed and destroyed because of it. Salt routes were preferred routes that were used to conduct the salt trade from production centres to the areas of consumption. The Roman Empire had a network of salt routes (viae salariae), from which salt traders (salarii) organised the trade. In the Middle Ages, salt routes were spread throughout Europe. In Africa (Sahara, Niger), Asia (Tibet) and South America (Bolivia) there are still functioning caravan routes used by the salt trade. --Eleassar777 14:18, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC) Reason for removal:
 * See also trans-Saharan trade for information on the Saharan routes. Warofdreams
 * not enough votes--Wonderfool t(c)e) 10:08, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)