Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Talk page


 * 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
Kind of self explanatory, a group of users dedicated to improving talk pages   • S • C  • A • R  • C • E •   18:08, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Support
Please specify whether or not you would join the project.
 * 1)  • S • C  • A • R  • C • E •   18:08, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 2) Support, although I'm heavily involved in the ToL project and would not be able to commit myself to this project as well. However, I will continue to do my best as a part-time talk page helper. Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 00:54, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 3) Support, but I don't think I'll join the project just yet. Maybe sometime next year.  Kayau  Wuthering Heights  VANITY FAIR   paradise lost  11:08, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 4) Support. I'm not really interesting in joining myself, but I can see that some editors giving talk pages some TLC would improve the discussion of articles. Fences  &amp;  Windows  23:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Discussion
What sort of things needimproving on talk pages? I occasionally tidy things up by adding the approp topic wikiproject and adding section headings for entries at the top of the page. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 20:44, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Exactly, all talk pages require newtalk, Wikiprojects, the occasional shell, possible archiving. Many, many talk pages are incorrectly prepared and most Template talk pages haven't been created at all  • S • C  • A • R  • C • E •   23:15, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Talk pages should not be created until they are needed. Also, the "New Talk" template is the worst mechanism I have seen for notifying users of new comments, and the "shells" as you call them make it more difficult to understand how to edit a page and achieve the desired results.  It is usually misused on user talk pages.  If a user wants to watch a conversation, there's a watchlist for that purpose. (Comments retracted by Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) on 00:52, 5 August 2009 (UTC))  If you want to help improve talk pages, things that need done are as follows:
 * Help SineBot by signing unsigned comments
 * Sort misplaced comments into the correct topic or add a topic header when needed
 * Remove off-topic comments and warn the user
 * Clean up formatting mistakes, such as tags that didn't get closed
 * Sort topics into chronological order with the oldest at the top
 * Keep WikiProject boilerplates and related templates down to a reasonable maximum
 * Archive discussions
 * I'd be more willing to support the project if these were the sort of things it stood for, rather than applying fancy templates like New Talk and shells. (Comments retracted by Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) on 00:52, 5 August 2009 (UTC)) Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 23:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That was the wrong template, I have since, corrected it, you do understand I'm talking about mainspace talk pages, right? A talk page (in my opinion) should contain a template similar to the one above plus the related WikiProject templates. I think that as soon as a page is created it's talk page should be created along with it, if not these are often incorrectly prepared. If you'll see Talk:Barack Obama, you can see there is over 15 WikiProject templates, I think that's ridiculous. 00:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Based on your correction, I've retracted the irrelevant comments. The instance you just pointed to is a perfect candidate for such a project.  For starters, I'd recommend not inventing a template that says "This talk page is within the scope of WikiProject Talk Pages".  That would defeat the project's purpose.  No, this project would have to be as transparent as possible.  In my opinion, the Newtalk template serves as clutter in general, and should be used sparingly, such as on Template talk pages or articles around heated political topics, which are likely to have such discussion that would actually pose a need for the template.  As a general rule, I'd say don't add that template until its need is proven.  However, I would support the overall goal of this project, and will hereby put my name on the support list. Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 00:52, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * notaforum is another one that should be added when needed, maybe even temporarily. I've noticed these may be needed for a lot of teen icons and sex symbols etc. A within the scope template would not relate to the article (and would have to be added to more than talk pages!) It would generally become known through word of mouth (or... type, how ever you'd phrase it). And the guidelines for talk pages and talk page assembly would become more known a easier to access/reference   • S • C  • A • R  • C • E •   01:03, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * ''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.