Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Mercia


 * The following discussion is an archived proposal of the WikiProject below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the project's talk page (if created) or the WikiProject Council).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The resulting WikiProject was not created

Description
The project will seek to manage all articles relating to the people, settlements and history of the Anglo-Saxon Kingdom of Mercia, England, and to related articles of interest, with the aim of improving the structure and standard of articles and to prioritise work on those articles which can achieve the highest standard Metabaronic (talk) 19:47, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Support
Please specify whether or not you would join the project.
 * 1) Metabaronic (talk) 19:47, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * 2)  ðarkun coll 17:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) I may join the project in the future, but I cannot dedicate time to it as of now. bloodofox: (talk) 20:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * 4) BabelStone (talk) 20:26, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * 5) Limited time available but I would help out where I can. Mike Christie (talk) 22:02, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Discussion
Isn't this a rather too-narrow scope? Yes, there are things still to be written, and there is (as always) a great deal of room for improving what we currently have, but Anglo-Saxon Mercia already has a decent level of coverage, from Ælfhere to Wulfrun. I feel that "Anglo-Saxon England" might be a more appropriate scope. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:40, 11 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Well I proposed this project for several reasons. My own interest is exclusively Mercian - I am well-place to research and contribute to this topic, and I've been doing work on Category:Mercia to create a broad canvas of articles which the project can cover. At its greatest extent Mercia was the largest individual Kingdom in the Heptarchy, and I've already identified 5 sub-categories and 103 pages so far, which seems quite a good number of articles as a starting point. It also capitalises on interest in Staffordshire Hoard as well as applying some consistency that can be carried over to broader Anglo-Saxon articles in future. My principal reason, however, is that by focusing on Mercian articles the project can address the fact that most Anglo-Saxon accounts of history (particularly Bede) have a non-Mercian bias, and there is therefore a greater need to draw on contemporary research than in other parts of the country. I'm sure there are plenty of people with an interest in Northumbria, Wessex etc., who may choose to follow suit, and there's be no harm in a merger at a later stage. Metabaronic (talk) 17:18, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I think Angus McLellan's concern is the same as mine: how would a full-fledged WikiProject help you achieve these goals in a way that a more modest approach -- say creating a Mercia Taskforce under the WikiProject:Middle Ages? Being a task force would allow you to tap into the existing procedures & manpower of a WikiProject. And I don't see how any organization on Wikipedia would help you overcome the non-Mercian bias you point out. I agree that it exists, but that is due to the nature of the primary literary evidence -- which is mostly non-Mercian in nature -- & the secondary sources, not the Wikipedia community. -- llywrch (talk) 15:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not bothered whether its a WikiProject or a task force (I can't find any guidelines about the favoured size of a WikiProject or a task force - can anybody signpost this), although it is for a parent WikiProject to propose such a project, and they haven't. For my own part, I'm not sure whether or not WikiProject:Middle Ages would restrict the scope. As a project I'd expect Mercia to include myth and legend, geography and the modern legacy of Mercia ranging from Mercian bicycles to the establishment of the West Mercian Police area to the emergence of the Mercian political identity and the growing cultural impact of the Staffordshire Hoard. Metabaronic (talk) 21:13, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with Angus and Llywrch. When you say favoured size of a WikiProject or Task Force, do you mean the number of articles that fall under the scope, or the number of members? Neither really matter too much. There are taskforces with 900 articles, such as the Law & Order taskforce, a task force of the TV Wikiproject. I've not heard of a project restricting a task force. Task forces can have some of their own rules and just look to the project for guidance and rules where the task force has none. Finally, you say it is for a parent Project to propose a subject. A project is made up of Wikipedians. It takes a Wikipedian to propose a subject, and you are a Wikipedian. I think you should propose a taskforce at WT:MA. Matthewedwards :  Chat  01:05, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Concerning favoured size I was referring to the number of articles. I may be a Wikipedian, but I'm a relatively new one, and I'm not an active member of WikiProject:Middle Ages nor, as I stated previously, am I convinced that WP:MA (or WT:MA for that matter), is the right parent for such a task force. Angus's suggestion for a WikiProject:Anglo Saxon England makes more sense, and Mercia would certainly work as a task force there, but again, would it be right to propose a whole new WikiProject just so I could work in its first task force?


 * Of course, we're all wikipedians, and its not what I want as the proposer that matters. Perhaps the first step is to get consensus on scope, then, reflecting on what is agreed, we get consensus on WikiProject vs. task force, followed (if needed) by consesnsus on parenthood. Metabaronic (talk) 08:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree that it would be better to work within something like WP:MA. There doesn't appear to be enough support here for a fully-fledged WikiProject; a project can absorb a fair amount of administrative time, and two of your five volunteers have indicated limitations on their commitment.  One benefit of a project is to coordinate and manage collaborative work; I think you can do that on scale likely to be needed without a project's superstructure. Mike Christie (talk) 16:08, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I would very much support the creation of an Anglo-Saxon WikiProject. I am sure that there are a lot more people interested in Anglo-Saxon related articles than just Mercia-related articles.BabelStone (talk) 17:43, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay, consensus would seem to be that WikiProject:Anglo-Saxon England be put forward as a proposal, with Mercia identified as a task force within it. I'll support that (even propose it), but how would it relate to WikiProject:England and WikiProject:Middle Ages? I'm keen that its scope addresses modern cultural, geographic, mythic and political legacies as well as period articles. A good solid handle on dealing with "popular culture" needs to be in place from the start. Metabaronic (talk) 19:53, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It sounds as if you need a cross-project task force. I am personally only interested in the Anglo-Saxon aspects of Mercia, but I don't see any reason why a Mercia task force under an Anglo-Saxon WikiProject could not extend its scope to cover more general and modern Mercian topics. Perhaps it could also be registered with other relevant WikiProjects. BabelStone (talk) 21:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Like BabelStone, I'm only interested in the Anglo-Saxon aspects of Mercia. Mike Christie (talk) 21:59, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * One last question before I propose. Should the WikiProject be WikiProject:Anglo-Saxons, WikiProject:Anglo Saxon England, or WikiProject:Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms? The latter seems most accurate as it would cover both the Heptarchy and a unified England.Metabaronic (talk) 16:22, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Now put forward as WikiProject Council/Proposals/Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms


 * ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the project's talk page (if created) or at the WikiProject Council). No further edits should be made to this page.