Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Björk/Archive 1

Björk articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Björk articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (&diams;) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 22:06, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!


Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Discussion about Björk genres
Hi all, there is a discussion at Talk:Björk about which genres, and how many genres, should be used to describe the artist in the article's infobox. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:31, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Vulnicura Live
Do we need the separate articles Vulnicura Live (Rough Trade Exclusive) and Vulnicura Live (Commercial Release)? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:44, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No, essentially it's one album with two slightly different releases, the same as when an artist releases an album and then later releases a "deluxe edition" with bonus tracks. The two should be merged. anemone  projectors  08:53, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages
Greetings Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, — Delivered: 17:56, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Björk: Archives
I redirect Björk: Archives to the main Björk article, at least until more information about the book is released. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:06, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

I created a short article about Björk: Archives. Please feel free to help with its expansion. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:34, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Should there is an article for the MoMA exhibit specifically? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:11, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Update: I went ahead and created Björk (exhibition). --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 01:00, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, will post at /Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of. We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
 * The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
 * The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
 * The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to for his original, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject
The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template Transclude lead excerpt.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you. &mdash; The Transhumanist  07:27, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello
Hello there an welcome to the world of Wikipediamusic projects ....OK so i am Moxy i have seen you around...I help projects get started ...i make temples..portals...help projects with the projects page layouts etc...So Another Believer i know you been here a long time and may not need any help at all..,,but would you like any help in this areas. ...?? Moxy (talk) 04:01, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Assistance is always appreciated! This is a collaborative WikiProject, afterall! :) -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 04:40, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * ok then lets make you a portal in the next day or so..what colours and articles you would like to see in the portal ???Moxy (talk) 04:47, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No color preferences at the moment, especially since those can be easily changed in the future. Of course links to her studio albums would be very helpful. As far as I know, List of awards and nominations received by Björk is the only featured list in the project, and Debut (Björk album) and Homogenic are the only Good articles. Björk discography is also very important for readers to have easy access to. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 04:55, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * , The portal was deleted, so some pages/templates may need updating. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Quality and importance rating scales
I went ahead and added Quality and Importance rating scales to improve the project, so be sure to check out the Assessment page for more information.

For determining the Importance rating (Low, Mid, High, Top) please keep the following in mind:
 * Approximate breakdown of the percentage of articles in each category as a goal.
 * Top=1%
 * High=15%
 * Mid=30%
 * Low=55%

Here is what I am thinking:


 * Top priority = Björk
 * High priority = studio albums + awards list + discography
 * Mid priority = EPs + live albums + video albums
 * Low priority = songs, Matthew Barney, etc.

Feel free to post any questions or comments regarding the scales and ratings. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:57, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Task #1?
Well, I was hoping the Popular Pages and Article Alerts would have started by now, but patience is a virtue. We have just a handful of participants signed up for the project at the moment, but I'd love to hit the ground running. Any suggestions for the first task this project should tackle? My suggestion is to get Selmasongs: Music from the Motion Picture Soundtrack Dancer in the Dark up to Good status, but I look forward to seeing additional suggestions. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:58, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, the article on Björk herself was once a GA. perhaps we should attempt to push that back how it was? Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow! That is quite an undertaking, but I like when editors think big. My only concern is that there are so few participants at this time--it would be a lot of work for just 1 or 2 editors. I posted a reminder on project members' talk pages asking them to add this page to their watchlist, so hopefully others will respond with their suggestions. If they are up to the task, we will certainly take it on! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:09, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, I can't find a discussion about why the Björk article was de-listed from Good status. Perhaps there isn't one. I was hoping for a list of issues that needed to be addressed if it is to be re-listed. -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:54, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Pageview stats
After a recent request, I added WikiProject Björk to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at WikiProject Björk/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 00:41, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations... featured list?
Bjork's list of awards and nominations seems severely under sourced, so I'm questioning its "Featured list" status even though I'd hate to see the list demoted. Feel free to contribute to this discussion. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:46, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

The Best Mixes from the Album Debut for All the People Who Don't Buy White Labels
I think The Best Mixes from the Album Debut for All the People Who Don't Buy White Labels should be pretty easy to get promoted to Good article status. Are any project members aware of additional sources to add, or interested in collaborating and nominating? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:24, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Project members are invited to contribute to the ongoing discussion about this article's title on its talk page. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:48, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like and turns it into something like
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from cite web, cite journal and doi.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)