Wikipedia:Collaboration of the week/Wikispecies

Wikispecies

 * Nominated on 18:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC); needs 6 votes by 24 January.

It's actually embarrassing that a sisterproject of Wikipedia has that less of an article.

Support:
 * 1) [[Image:Weather rain.png]] Soothing  R  18:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Urthogie 20:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) King of Hearts | (talk) 01:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) Samsara contrib talk 08:26, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Comments:
 * Why is it embrrassing? Would it be embarrassing if Britannica didn't have a decent article on the second cousin of ifs editor-in-chief? Wikipedia's concern should be informing people on important topics, not covering its own basis and obsessively navel-gazing. Especially not with a project as secondary as this. A better argument would have been "We have so much information on the Uncyclopedia article, yet so little on a vastly more important and meaningful Wikipedia-derived project?" But even that wouldn't convince me. I'm more worried about having decent articles on Mozart, astrophysics, and ancient Greek literature than having a decent article about "Wikispecies". -Silence 09:11, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Hell, for that matter, I'm more concerned with having decent articles on speciation and on life itself than on something like this. Aren't you? -Silence 09:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Silence, theres nothing wrong with supporting both articles on Wikipedia and on other life, its not either or.--Urthogie 10:22, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It is on Collaboration of the Week. Every week a frivolous article gets to be CotW, a thousand vital articles that could have benefited greatly from the attention get neglected. I never said that I oppose individuals improving the Wikispecies article; I'd love to see it improved and made more informative and in-depth. But I strongly oppose making it the Collaboration of the Week and wasting so much time on something that very likely won't be at all significant 10 or 20 years down the line, while there are tens of thousands of badly-neglected topics out there that will still be significant a thousand years down the line, should civilization last that long. C'mon. -Silence 05:06, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Well anyways, it seems like it wont get nominated regardless :)--Urthogie 08:01, 23 January 2006 (UTC)