Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lego/Archive 1

Articles for sets
Is it too much to have an article about each lego set? Or even just every major lego set? Each article could have an infobox with set #, series, year first produced, a picture of the set etc? What do you guys think? Timkovski 21:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I disagree and agree. There are thousands of individualsets, even making the major sets would be an issue, still dozens and what would it be? a few sentences? if we just use the infoboxes you could still give info without putting thousands of articles that are tiny. I am greatat making infoboxes, so I can help out with that. Mocha2007 (talk) 15:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree. The sets should be listed on their "theme" and/or "subtheme" page. -AMK152 23:30, 14 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Great, is anyone any good at making infoboxes, templates? I will give it a go later and post it here to see what you guys think. Timkovski 08:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * In my view listing every set here is not a good idea. There might be 10 sets that would pass an AfD here, if that, most of them are completely unencyclopedic (you'd have to show relevance and impact on culture or society I think). BrickWiki is a better place for that sort of thing and already has a lot of that set up. As for templates and the like, I've some facility. See WPBeatles which I had no small part in getting to where it is now. If this project wants to participate in WP 1.0 article grading I can modify the article talk template to pick up rankings and I can create the categories etc, as was done for WP:Beatles. ++Lar: t/c 13:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * After actually realising how many different lego sets there are, I agree with you Lar, I propose a separate page for each theme and subtheme. Each page could give details about the story behind the theme, minifigs associated with the theme, list of sets in the theme and perhaps sections about the theme's main sets eg the royal castle set from the royal knights theme? Timkovski 13:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Each theme perhaps... and I think some of those exist already. (for instance Lego_train which is in the Category:Lego_themes) Subthemes I think need merely be mentioned in the theme, unless they are really significant. (some of the subthemes there now in the category, I would merge) Sorry if I'm sounding like a wet blanket but the last thing I want to see is people put a lot of work into articles and have them get deleted. Again, BrickWiki is the place for detail, and every article should link to the corresponding BrickWiki article(s) for more info... ++Lar: t/c 14:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Using the Lego themes page, each theme should have their own page, with a list of subthemes and descriptions. In the discriptions, there should be info on the sets. That's what I think. -AMK152 17:40, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, no. We could do articles concerning LEGO themes like Star Wars, but there are MILLIONS of sets, so NO. I wouldn't suggest it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The warlord of music (talk • contribs) 00:48, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

brickwiki
Brickwiki Is an open LEGO encyclopedia powered by MediaWiki. You may want to copy content Back and forth (Both are under the GNU). And if any LEGO Article is up for Deletion (For being too trivial) it can be moved to brickwiki. Before you create a new LEGO article you may want to check both ours and theirs sights first.--E-Bod 01:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Project talkpage box WikiProject_Lego
The project box {{tl|WikiProject_Lego}) contains the LEGO logo. That's probably not a good idea as the logo is copyrighted (LEGO's permission for certain liminted use notwithstanding) and therefore fair use and therefore by WikiMedia foundation policy, should be used ONLY on article pages directly related, and not for decoration. WP:Beatles ran into this too. I'll fix it and we can discuss it in that talk page if there's a problem ++Lar: t/c 15:01, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Project Title
Shouldn't this be Wikiproject LEGO instead of Wikiproject Lego? Should another goal be to have appropriate capitalization of LEGO thoughout all articles? timrem 03:18, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The manual of style suggests that whatever corporations may actually want, the style is to capitalise only the first letter of proper names including corporate ones, so there may be some resistance to going with LEGO (although it's my personal preference) There have been revert wars over trying to get LEGO to stick. ++Lar: t/c 06:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I do think that it should be LEGO, because that is how it is written, basically everywhere. I wasn't sure about it when i started the project. -AMK152 18:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC).
 * That is my preference. And for the project it could be OK. But if it's put into articles it will start revert wars. That's all I'm saying. Not that I agree. ++Lar: t/c 02:27, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps if we get a lot of people to agree with this idea, then we could possibly go through with it. I prefer LEGO also. -AMK152 03:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't care what we do to the name User: Squirrelmassacre

Lego
Lego is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy 21:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It isn't any more though 'I didn't meet current standards' Gran2 21:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Products problem
Help me! All users put information of probabily future sets of Bionicle theme, to from of germany Amazon. All of products are not official confirmed to released. What our opinion and solution of this? Antidermis2319 02:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, hey, hey. Originally YOU were the one that put them on the Star Wars page, I said not to, and then when you did, I removed them, but you put it on again. So I just gave in. So first off don't blame other users for that one. But as for your point, in an ideal world we wouldn't put them on, but its doing no harm, they are practically confirmed anyway, we can just add more information when Lego releases it. Gran2 07:59, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. Before I don't understand you, and now a real problem as Bionicle page. Ah, now I understand your advice. Antidermis2319 16:21, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Shortcut
Created! Dfrg.msc 02:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I created the WT:LEGO one for here and placed a shortcut box at the top of this page, and I see you placed a shortcut box at the top of the WP:LEGO page as well. Excellent

Project Directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:
 * User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
 * User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
 * User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 23:58, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Request for Work
Hello, I'm Dfrg.msc, and I want to make some constructive edits to Wikipedia. It's not that I am unable to, I would just like some guidance. So, if you have any specific tasks related to this topic, please inform me on my talk page, be specific and include links and I'll help out as soon as I can. Thanks, Dfrg.m s c 1. 2 . 3 07:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Quasi-Newb needy
Hey, I'm not really a newbie - I just haven't done the whole Project stuff before. I just want to make sure that if one wished to join, one would simply add their name to the list, right? I just don't want screams of 'Hey, who's this guy?' and the like. --Arkracer 21:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep that's all. But this isn't the most lively of projects, so I don't think many would mind if you just started a discussion without formally joining. Gran2 22:03, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD Proposal: Lego Duplo Thomas & Friends
Greetings from WP:THOMAS!

Article 'Lego Duplo Thomas & Friends' has been slated for deletion, along with a stack of other 'merchandise' pages, most of which are simply undetailed lists. As someone has identified the page as being part of WP:LEGO, I thought I should draw your attention to the AfD, which has been running for quite a few days now. (My apologies: none of the active WP:THOMAS members have any knowledge, nor much inclination, concerning 'Thomas' merchandise! It's never been top of the ToDo list!!)

The delete discussion is at Articles for deletion/Thomas Tomy Wind Ups.

The original view of WP:THOMAS members was for all articles to be kept. However, we have now secured a new home for them at a fledgling enthusiast Wiki site:Train Spotting World, so the project viewpoint is that we will not oppose the AfD after all. If WP:LEGO wishes to keep the page, someone will need to start shouting on the AfD page very soon!

Regards, on behalf of WP:THOMAS. -- EdJogg 01:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Incidentally, having just looked-up Thomas & Friends at brickwiki, you may be interested to know that that wiki has NO information about the 'Thomas' sets yet. So this may be an ideal chance for someone to add it. :o) EdJogg 01:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Lego Board Games article
I have created a Lego Board Games article, but it still needs a lot of work.

Replacement for brick picture in templates
I've made a render of a red 2x4 LEGO brick for possible use in templates and such, instead of the. What do you all think, should I upload it to Wikipedia and replace the current pic? I've made both SVG and PNG versions.

PNG SVG - HotWheels (53) Talk 18:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I certainly like it - I say go ahead, it's better than what's being used at the moment. TheIslander 11:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I uploaded the PNG version (for some reason Firefox won't load the SVG) and replaced the brick picture in the main Lego article and the WikiProject LEGO template. I think it would look better with a transparent background, so I'll change that as soon as I can get to a computer with Photoshop.  HotWheels (53) Talk 15:29, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I meant to say that actually - I agree it'd look better with a transparent background. Also a tad smaller, perhaps. The userbox icon will also need changing. TheIslander 15:33, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Pull the camera back so the perspective isn't so forced, please.. I like this version's perspective better although the image itself isn't as good... ++Lar: t/c 11:39, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Sprawling lists
Would it not be better to convert the very long lists of Lego Town, Lego Space & Lego Castle to a tabular format?

I've done so for a few lists in Lego Town & Lego Space.

I've used the folowing format:

Can anyone help in cleaning up these articles?

Aeons | Talk  18:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I sarted this in the licensed theme articles a while back, see List of Lego Star Wars sets, good that someone is carrying it on. Gran2 18:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Conversion for Lego Space has been completed. Aeons | Talk  12:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

More sprawling lists
Found this one which has more advanced tables: LEGO Rock Raiders

The following also have sprawling lists which may also need conversion to a tabular format:
 * Lego Aquazone
 * Lego Time Travels
 * Lego Adventurers
 * Lego Wild West
 * Aqua Raiders
 * Lego Studios
 * Lego Sports
 * Lego Alpha Team
 * Lego Spider-Man
 * Lego Make & Create
 * Lego Batman
 * Lego Dino Attack
 * Lego Exo-Force
 * Lego Vikings
 * Lego Pirates

There are many, so please, help out.

Aeons | Talk  13:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

LEGO Digital Designer
Why do LDraw and MLCAD have articles but not LEGO Digital Designer? LEGO Digital Designer should have an aritcle. --209.247.5.74 13:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Ratings
Who rates the articles? I've just rewritten the Legoland Windsor article (see it's talk page), and believe that it's now worth more than a 'start'. TheIslander 11:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Lego Template Ugly
Can we get something more aesthetically pleasing than fully saturated red? It "pops" way too much and clashes with the subdued WikiPedia graphical style. And it makes my articles look ugly.

Legoland Windsor Peer Review
Don't know if anyone here's interested, but after having done a huge amount of work towards the Legoland Windsor guide, I have now submitted it for peer review, in the hope of eventually gaining a GA or FA status. Take a look - all comments appreciated ;). The Islander 23:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

See also sections
see user_talk:AMK152... I think see alsos and the template serve different purposes. Discussion probably would be better here. ++Lar: t/c 11:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Minifig Customization
I have created this article suggested on the main page of this Wikiproject. Definitely still needs work though. Jukilum 17:32, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

 * 5 September - expires 10 September
 * Lego Arctic ( PROD by User:Jaranda; "Lego Arctic are a collective theme of Lego toys released in 2000." ) --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 13:39, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Note that this is now Articles for deletion/Lego Arctic. Best regards --TreeKittens 01:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Bionicle
Why are all of the major bionicle articles being removed, by doing so the knowledge of the entire community is being depleted. So I say that the deletion of these articles is nothing but decremental —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.226.101 (talk) 14:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Lego Portal
I think there should be a good self standing page for this.

Also of some benefit would be a page for each worthwhile site. For some examples: peeron and brickshelf and bricklink and lugnet (among others.) Ill create them because I happen to have been around the online Lego world for quite some time and have gathered much information. If anyone with better wiki-authoring skills would like to create/edit them that would be better. I can supply content and information but not proper grammar/wiki formatting. If you are interested in this, then please say so on my talk page. If I do not get any creation offers, people might just start seeing pages pop up authored by me about lego fan created sites. Or I'll get too busy again and others will have to create them if they want them. Stoneagegeek (talk) 20:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Portal:Lego
Portal:Lego, a page you created, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Lego and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Lego during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ultra! 15:38, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
 * The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
 * The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
 * A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot  ( Disable )  20:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Bionicle Task force?
Who thinks we should have a Bionicle Task force? I will create one when we have a few members. Tutthoth-Ankhre (talk) 18:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

1. Tutthoth-Ankhre

I agree, and I will join. I hope the Bionicle section can be improved here on Wiki, and this is the best way to do so. Lesovikk1996 (talk) 18:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Lego
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. &mdash; Delievered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:49, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the  parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:20, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Infobox
I was just wondering if anyone here has ever considered making up an infobox for the seperate themes articles (eg. Lego Power Miners). I made a rough infobox for the Power Miners article on my user page using the generic infobox but fell short of what should be included within the box. So i was wondering if anyone was interested in either making one up or helping me add things to the generic one i started.

So in short any ideas on what should be included within an infobox about a Lego theme? Salavat (talk) 12:12, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I've created a quick Infobox template: Infobox Lego theme. Happy to take suggestions on what should be included. Frankie Roberto (talk) 17:03, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks great. One suggestion is that you might want to add some documentation so people know how to use use it and what parameters it contains. Salavat (talk) 01:09, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Good idea. I've added some documentation now, including an example and a 'blank' template that you can use to copy and paste into articles. Frankie Roberto (talk) 10:10, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation
This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.

We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.

If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Page layout
I just majorly changed the page layout based on WikiProject Video games style so if anyone has any comments or questions regarding the change, shoot away. Salavat (talk) 17:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 03:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on Biographies of living people
Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:

Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, nearly all wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:
 * 1) supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
 * 2) opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced article if they are not sourced, so your project may want to pursue source these articles as soon as possible. See the next, message, which may help..

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people
If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here
 * List of cleanup articles for your project

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip
 * Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip
 * Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

Ikip 02:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Hero Factory is up for deletion
Hero Factory is currently at AFD and has already been relisted once. Salavat (talk) 15:52, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Result was that it was closed with no consensus. Salavat (talk) 05:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar
I was just wondering if there was a WikiProject Lego Barnstar yet; I've seen a few users recently who I'd say have helped out enough to deserve one. If there isn't, I'd be happy to make one.  EW i kist Talk 15:14, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I dont think we have one, it would be under participation on the main page if there was one. Salavat (talk) 16:28, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Lego 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 Lego 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 23:15, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Using sortable tables when converting lists of sets
I'm in the process of changing the List of Lego Star Wars sets page from regular tables to sortable tables (it's not a tough thing to do). I think it would be good to do that as default for all the set list pages. The SW page also has the piece count for the set, is it worth adding that to other lists if they don't have it? Grahamwest (talk) 22:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Ive used this format for these four articles, seems to work pretty well: Lego Games, Hero Factory, Lego Prince of Persia, Lego Toy Story. Obvisously it would be great to have tables with piece counts on all the theme pages, but its just the fact of getting around to it. Salavat (talk) 15:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

LEGO Hero Factory (TV show) prodded for deletion
LEGO Hero Factory (the TV series article) has been prodded for deletion for being non-notable. If you can improve its notable please add to the article. Salavat (talk) 08:35, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Lego themes licensed from Disney
Should there be a category for these themes? The following articles are in both Category:Disney merchandise and Category:Lego themes: Also, this category would contain the themes Lego Cars and Lego Winnie the Pooh, were articles to be created on them. gz 33 (talk) 01:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Lego Mickey Mouse
 * Lego Pirates of the Caribbean
 * Lego Prince of Persia
 * Lego Toy Story
 * Sounds appropriate as there is enough articles for the category. Dont know what the name would be though. "Lego themes based on Disney licenses"? Salavat (talk) 03:49, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * "Lego themes licensed from Disney"? gz 33 (talk) 04:18, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Also works, I have no problem with the naming either way. Salavat (talk) 08:03, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Themes infobox
Hi, I've made an altered version of Template:Infobox Lego theme, which allows for an extra interval of availability. See the talk page. gz 33 (talk) 05:08, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Listing set numbers
Hi, I'm glad to have found WikiProject Lego! I was curious about one item I saw on the To-Do list, which was "List set numbers and descriptions of sets in an organized manner." Is this saying to list the set number at any reference to the LEGO set, or in a specific table on articles such as theme pages (or both)? This would be a task I'd be perfectly able and willing to do, but I'm just looking for clarification. Thanks, George Barnick – Talk/Contribs 21:02, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject Lego at Wikimania 2014
Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014 For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to: Project leaflets Adikhajuria (talk) 16:53, 26 June 2014 (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)

Request for comment on creating omnibus articles for sets and themes
'''Should we combine articles on individual Lego sets and themes into omnibus articles or lists? If so, what form should these articles take? 20:08, 29 September 2012 (UTC)'''


 * Rationale from proposer: During the recent discussion at Articles for deletion/Lego Monster Fighters, it was pointed out that this was one of many such articles. Rather than have a more deletion discussions it seems appropriate to discuss omnibus articles of some sort that deal with the sets and themes in large groups. Most if not all of them are not individually notable and would be deleted at AFD because of the lack of sources. However, the overall topic of Lego sets and themes is notable. Since there is little to say about each set or theme it should be relatively easy to group them into larger articles of some kind, with existing and future articles on individual themes and sets redirecting to them. The main decision to my mind is how those articles should be organized.

Three possible options:
 * Alphabeticaly
 * chronologicaly
 * By related themes

Also, should the articles be organized as simple lists, or should they have a section for each set or theme? Beeblebrox (talk) 20:08, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, we should merge articles that are unexpandable beyond perma-stub, and we should not be trying to exhaustively list all purchasable sets.
 * With a sortable-table, all 3 organization options are possible at once; picking the default would be the only choice (chronological is my preference for that).
 * We're definitely not trying to replicate Brickset's directory or lugnut's directory, nor even wikia:lego:List of themes. (And those resources should be prominently noted as the locations for completist listings.)
 * Quantity: Need a clearer list of what content is being considered for inclusion/merging, before weighing in on whether an article or a list is more appropriate. Could you (or someone) sketch out some rough numbers/examples, from the content within Template:Lego (current and discontinued themes), and Category:Lego themes? (I assume 90% of that content, or so?)
 * Quality: Which articles are the current best representations of usable prose? Lego Modular Houses (GA) according to the statistics. Lego Atlantis also looks quite well written, from just a glance around. At the other extreme are articles like Belville (Lego) which seems almost unexpandable (i tried googling, but found very little).
 * Merging the unexpandable perma-stubs, into a full-featured list (ie, making List of Lego themes a Featured list eventually) might be ideal. A few sets/themes warrant separate articles, but not all. (These other featured lists (eg) might be helpful reference models.)
 * HTH. —Quiddity (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I am planning to try and tag all articles that would be affected by this, but at the moment I have to go to work. Looks like about 65 articles give or take, may be able to get to it later today. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm, may take a moment to determine the full list of proposed mergers. I have discovered we already have a list article at List of Lego themes, as well as Category:Lego themes. I'm thinking a quick review of every entry in the category to insure it is the type of article we are talking about here, that is a single theme with no real notability unto itself. Once we have a comprehensive list I'll either begin the tagging or try to get an WP:AWB user to do it all at once. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:38, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Certainly sounds a good idea, merging the articles, but don't get carried away. I think themes like Ninjago, Bionicle and Hero Factory deserve to have their own articles. So, my opinion is: good idea in principle, might well work, but don't get carried away. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:58, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

So, how would we define which ones are "deserving" of their own articles? When I looked at Lego Castle my initial reaction was that here is a nice long article, with lots of detail, on a theme that has carried from the seventies right through to the present. Then I took a look at the sources. They are garbage as far as establishing notability. As are the sources on almost all Lego theme articles.

They mostly seem to fall into these categories:


 * Brickset pages
 * other fan sites
 * catalogs or other sales materials
 * Books about Legos such as the "Lego Star Wars character encyclopedia"

While these may be ok sources for verification purposes, they are worthless as far as notability is concerned. As that is the standard for having a Wikipedia aricle I think we will find going forward that in fact the sat majority of themes are justifiable candidates for merging. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:26, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe it would be a very big page, which would be unwieldy to navigate. I'm against it. Can someone come up with a good source considering notability? 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 15:47, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * That is rather the whole point. Generally there are not reliable, independent sources that discuss toy themes in detail. Many of these articles have been here for years and have either no sources at all or links to retail websites that sell toys. The other option as I see it is to delete most of them. Keeping them as stand-alone articles is not really a tenable position. Yes, it will be a long list. I am certainly open to the possibility of breaking it up by which decade the theme premiered or a simple alphabetical splitting. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:47, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I vote for a combination of chronological-listing and related theme-listing. It seems the best way, to me. Although I also see the perks of having it in alphabetical order. And, in answer to Wakuran, I have had experience of large list-like articles and I have learnt to navigate them. Other users can to. --ProtoDrake (talk) 19:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I think Lego Technics is very different to normal lego sets and should retain it's own article. 82.46.109.233 (talk) 12:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

example entry
I thought it might be good to take one of the candidate pages and use this section to sandbox how it might look when merged. I'm not an expert at tables so I'm hoping someone with more knowledge of that area can help out. More or less at random I picked Lego Aqua Raiders to serve as an example. For reference here is the article body as it exists right now (17:39, 4 October 2012 (UTC)) minus the merge tag, navbox, and categories:

Aqua Raiders was one of the Lego Group's new themes for 2007. The setting is in the Bermuda Triangle. A group of divers go down with high tech submarines and other equipment to look for lost treasure and shipwrecks.

==Aqua Raiders Team== The Aqua Raiders team was the only team that was brave enough to fight the depths of the Bermuda Triangle. Equipped with the latest technology, they were sent to recover a treasure from an ancient king.

In the Trench game, one of the Aqua Raiders spoke, and he had a strong Australian accent, leading to believe that the Aqua Raiders are of Australian origin.

==Sea Monsters== When they start the mission to go under the depths, they are attacked by several underwater creatures within a matter of seconds.
 * Sea Snakes
 * Giant Crabs
 * Giant Lobsters
 * Giant Angler fish
 * Giant Tiger Sharks
 * Giant squid

==Vehicles and Weapons== The Aqua Raiders have a variety of weapons and vehicles, which, according to the Aqua Raiders website, is the latest technology developed for undersea exploration.

Vehicles

 * A mini-sub
 * A one-man underwater boat
 * A shark-killer sub
 * A giant sub
 * A treasure sub
 * Another unnamed submarine that resembles a helicopter

===Weapons=== Both the vehicles and men carry weapons around to fend off the creatures.
 * A spear gun
 * A drill
 * A harpoon cannon
 * Several small turrets

==Set list== Here is a list of the sets.
 * 7770-Deep Sea Treasure Hunter- Includes 2 sea snakes, diver, rocks, and sea scooter.
 * 7771-Angler Ambush- Includes Angler fish, 2 divers, sea scooter, and rock formation.
 * 7772-Lobster Strike- Includes giant lobster, 2 divers, and a rover.
 * 7773-Tiger Shark Attack- Includes tiger shark, 2 divers, submarine, and large harpoon gun.
 * 7774-Crab Crusher- Includes giant crab, 2 divers, large submarine, 1 mini sub, and a robitic exploration device.
 * 7775-Aquabase Invasion- Includes giant squid, submarine, sea scooter, 4 divers, and the aquabase.
 * 7776-The Shipwreck- Includes 2 sea snakes, shipwreck, 2 divers, a skeleton and submarine.

==External links==
 * Official Site

actually this is a good example of the very lowest end of the spectrum of proposed mergers. No reliable sources, absurd levels of crafty details, and downright silliness like "The Aqua Raiders team was the only team that was brave enough to fight the depths of the Bermuda Triangle." This could easily be slimmed down into a simple entry in a table. Something like this

Name dates of production description

Lego Aqua Raiders 2006-2008 Bermuda Triangle/underwater exploration

Only properly formatted as a table of course, we'll get to that. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:39, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

better example entry
Hi, what about something like this...

User:2nyte 4:39, 19 October 2012 (AEST)


 * I was really, really hoping somebody who was good with making tables would come along. That looks great. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Implementation: redirect now or merge more content first?
In implementing the decision above, would it be appropriate to simply redirect Lego Exo-Force to the list article, or are there some details that still need to be incorporated into the list first? (This article came to my attention when I nominated a related article at Wikiquote for deletion, unsuccessfully.) ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:42, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I would think that anything that is already mentioned in the target article can be redirected, if more content is desirable it can easily be pulled from the page history. Anyone doing that should be sure to mention what article they are merging in their edit sumarry so that proper attribution is kept. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:51, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand. Has it been decided in this brief discussion that not a single Lego set is notable? Merge tags have been added to over 60 articles; has an effort been made to determine the notability, or lack thereof, of every one of these articles? Because it looks to me like the prevailing logic is that some of them aren't notable, therefore none of them are. DoctorKubla (talk) 12:09, 24 December 2012 (UTC)


 * If it's not too late I would like to dispute this merge. Sources and the contents of the Lego Star Wars franchise say this is notable enough for a separate article.  CRRays Head90  | Get Some! 10:03, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree. A mass merge is not the way to go. Each theme should be assessed seperatly. Try to find info like reviews on the various themes and then merge if nothing arises. Salavat (talk) 12:32, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment from closer: Formal closures are intended to draw a line under disputes to allow the community to move on. Over 60 articles tagged and an RfC being called is about as much exposure as a merge discussion can get. In other words, merge opponents have had more than enough opportunity to speak up and provide evidence that at least some of the sets meet notability requirements. Unless someone wants to dispute the accuracy of the closure (as opposed to the result of the discussion), my suggestion to merge opponents is to start separate ("unmerge") discussions for individual sets they believe meet notability requirements. (Further reading: Closing discussions.) Good raise  18:07, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I am also confused as to why it took several months for these objections to surface. Most of the alleged sources attached to these articles are either from Lego websites or fan sites, not reliable sources. I would suggest that the easiest way to proceed is to do pretty much all the merges, excepting any that have two or more references from actual independent reliable sources. If, when that is done, there are themes merged that a user thinks should have it's own article they should propose splitting it back off on the main article talk page and provide the sources at that time. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I do dispute the accuracy of the closure. Six people participated in the discussion. Beeblebrox obviously supported the proposal. Two users, Quiddity and ProtoDrake, supported merging some of the articles – they both expressed the opinion, however, that each article should be assessed on its own merits, and that a blanket merge was not the way to go. Wakuran was against the proposal. The anonymous IP said that the Lego Technic article should be retained, so we can put him down as being against a blanket merge. 2nyte didn't offer an opinion, but is presumably in favour of the proposal.


 * So that's two people supporting the proposal as stated, two (maybe three) people suggesting that only some of the articles be merged, and one person who flat out opposes the proposal. The outcome of that discussion should not have been "merge all articles". I'd call that a "no consensus" at best. DoctorKubla (talk) 21:22, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll grant you that had this been an AfD, it should have been closed as "no consensus" (i.e. "insufficiently strong consensus to delete") because of the higher skates (i.e. the articles' edit histories), but it was a merge discussion, which is an entirely different animal. Merge decisions reached outside of an AfD can easily be overturned by subsequent discussions and, unlike deletions, merges can be reverted without an administrator's toolbox. Suggesting that each article should be examined for notability individually loses, as an argument, a lot of teeth when during a month long discussion not a single article is shown to meet notability requirements. There was plenty of time to do that, and there still is. Especially in the light of this post-close opposition, I'm wondering if anyone actually wants to do the research necessary to demonstrate these articles' notability or whether what is happening here is a symptom of editors' being content with seeing the decision making process dragged out indefinitely (or at least until merge advocates lose interest or give up). Having weighed the arguments for their merits, rather than counting votes, I believe the closure to be reasonable. If you disagree, feel free to ask for reevaluation at the administrators' noticeboard. Good raise  23:50, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * This merge opponent didn't comment because he didn't find the discussion until this morning when he commented.  CRRays Head90  | Get Some! 03:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * dont merge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.232.9.14 (talk) 04:16, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Review of merge
Its now been over six months and the merge has clearly not been completed. The above discussion indicates questions over the closure and lack of consensus. I would propose that the current merge be marked as Stale and the merge tags be removed from corresponding articles.

There might be scope for a more focused merged discussions, with articles being treated individually. Some like Lego Technic, Bionicle and Lego Duplo seem to be clearly too large and important to be merged but others like Lego Ninja might be appropriate for merging.

The current list of articles to be merged include: --Salix (talk): 09:34, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * List of SpongeBob SquarePants merchandise


 * By Wikipedia policy, we can and should merge any article that does not have independent reliable sources. We should not be using Lego's own publications and promotional materials as sources for entire articles. I had meant to work on this but I obviously it slipped my mind at some point. The vast majority of these articles would never survive a deletion discussion, so merging still seems like the easiest road to me. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:10, 12 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I doubt it is a good idea because Bionicle has developed into such a full-blown franchise, that now we need a separate article to contain all of the information. Sure it may require some extra work maintaining it, but I believe that it is well worth the effort. After all, if Bionicle fans or people interested in the franchise found no main article for it, they would be very disappointed. I know I would. Besides, Wikipedia is one of the very few website with any complete information on Bionicle. LightandDark2000 (talk) 19:17, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Looking at the Bionicle article it is in fact clear that is an exception, because it does have at least a few independent reliable sources, something which is completely absent in the majority of the above listings. I've struck it from the list and will remove the merge tag from the article. Next thing would be to identify other articles that have actual RS like that so they can also be excluded. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:08, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I have seen these merge tags along with you,Bionicle should be merged with Lego themes,as people will want to know all of the Lego themes.I am fixing merge tags. CoolCDST (talk) 04:54, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

The merge tags have almost been done,I however disagree with *List of SpongeBob SquarePants merchandise by the way I updated your list. CoolCDST (talk) 01:51, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Going forward with merge
There are a significant number of items that still have merge tags. A review of the current state of the List of Lego themes, the vst majority of this content would not be suitable for a merge with the current structure there. Also, a lot of the content is sourced solely from Brickset.com, which I don't know if it's a reliable source or not. Please advise on the way forward. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 19:05, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think Brickset is a proper source. Not now, anyway. I've had time to look at it from an outside room. If brickset is the only source for an article, maybe that article should be deleted, because Lego isn't Wikipedia-friendly when it comes to references. --ProtoDrake (talk) 19:12, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I highly doubt that any of them should be merged; only the minor themes and vague articles should be considered for merging (if any at all). LightandDark2000 (talk) 01:34, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 * And that is the crux of this, as I strongly believe anything that only has fan sites as a source can and should be merged. This is still not a toy catalog. WP:N applies to Legos the same it applies to everything else. So, I agree with ProtoDrake, but as I am currently serving on ArbCom quite frankly I just don't have the time for such an undertaking. Beeblebrox (talk) 14:29, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note After a quick search I added many secondary sources to Lego Architecture. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 09:25, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Proposal: If a page or a few pages will be merged, I propose that in the table on the List of Lego themes page a short description must be written about the theme. Like for instance a short definition of the theme and why it is was discontinued. See an example below. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 13:10, 19 November 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) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Lego Space
Hello all, not sure how often this WikiProject is actually looked at but I thought I would post about an IP user who keeps moving the Life on Mars, Mars Mission, and Alien Conquest themes/sub-themes to places other than Space (which is where they are listed on places such as Brickset, Brickipedia, lugnut, etc.) and seems to think there was some consensus on doing so. If you would like to comment either here or at Talk:Lego Space on the issue then there might be some actual consensus made. Yosemiter (talk) 19:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Lego Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lego Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy to be moved to Lego Star Wars II. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 07:29, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Lego House listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lego House to be moved to Lego House (song). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 12:46, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Legoland Florida Resort listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Legoland Florida Resort to be moved to Legoland Florida. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 01:32, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Ole Kirk Christiansen listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Ole Kirk Christiansen to be moved to Ole Kirk Kristiansen. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 13:15, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Lego Nexo Knights listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lego Nexo Knights to be moved to Nexo Knights. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 21:32, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Proposed deletion of Kruncha and Nuckal


The article Kruncha and Nuckal has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * Page seems unlikely to comply with Notability; all sources I can find are not independent of the subject (in this case, created by Lego).

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Noah Kastin (talk) 09:27, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The comment above was suggested by the deletion notice on the Kruncha and Nuckal page. If this comment should not be here, please let me know. Noah Kastin (talk) 09:27, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Lego House (Billund) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lego House (Billund) to be moved to Lego House (building). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 10:02, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Lego House (Billund) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lego House (Billund) to be moved to Lego House (educational centre). This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 03:31, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Lego House (disambiguation) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lego House (disambiguation) to be moved to Lego House. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 08:31, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

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  07:45, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

List of Lego Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu episodes listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of Lego Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu episodes to be moved to List of Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu episodes. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:18, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Emmet Brickowski (character) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Emmet Brickowski (character) to be moved to Emmet Brickowski. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 11:32, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Need Help
Can anyone help me how to create this 5 new pages such as Lego DC Super Hero Girls, Lego The Lone Ranger, Lego Scooby-Doo!, Lego The Powerpuff Girls and Lego Overwatch ? Oon835 (talk) 06:28, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Lego Modular Buildings Reassessment
Lego Modular Buildings, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. FredModulars (talk) 23:27, 21 October 2019 (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)

Edits
Yosemiter can you please let me finish, I was in the middle of editing the table when I was referring to other articles. What I was going to do was add on articles with templates and change orientation. However, I guess someone won't let me try to edit anything and immediately deletes what I did 2 seconds after I did it.FredModulars (talk) 23:27, 19 November 2019 (UTC)


 * I offered assistance in my edit summary. It was not 2 seconds, the most recent was 14 minutes and the previous was over 90 minutes. Please use an edit summary and perhaps I can help. Such as you are removing |} every time, those are required to finish a table. Are you trying to add a maintenance page similar to WikiProject Lego/Recognized content? Then create WikiProject Lego/Maintenance or similar first. I can help you if needed, but I need to know your goal first. Yosemiter (talk) 23:33, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Articles
I made two draft articles and, if possible, was wondering if anyone could offer some feedback on them. Draft:Lego Creator Expert Draft:Lego Ultra Agents FredModulars (talk) 00:57, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * A reminder, this is essentially a dead page. You will likely find better help elsewhere as I am the only one here. However, I looked them over and I will give some feedback (and please read over the links the follow for a better understanding). In both, there is too much original research and synthetic conclusions, as well as a fail amount of peacocked adjectives that makes it read as unencyclopedic or as promotional. The main goal for a new page is that it must meet Wikipedia's General Notability Guideline, in which it must have multiple independent, reliable sources of significant depth about the subject. Not just set lists or reviews. Creator Expert has no official "subthemes" as you describe them per the official Lego sites. There are general annual releases, and fans have dubbed them into categories (vehicles, modulars, winter village, landmarks, etc.) but nothing from Lego itself. Creator Expert did not officially exist until 2013. There is a basic concept of advanced model that has always existed under various themes or no no theme at all (1978's USS Constellation comes to mind), but directly stating they are the same theme is Original Research without a good source for it. It seems merging the sourcable content into Lego Creator is a better option. For Ultra Agents, some of those sources look pretty good but might lack the sustained coverage to indicate a notable theme. The lasting impact might be there though due to the early use by Lego of incorporating apps into builds. Needs heavy editing though to remove the WP:FANCRUFT and WP:CATALOGUE aspects. Named heroes and villains, if independently discussed in other sources, would better be described in prose while removing their set listing entirely. If you would like, I can add the Articles for Creation template to each page to see what other article reviewers have to say about the pages. When I add the template, there is a button "Submit for review" and it will be added to the reviewers lists to look over. It can take a few weeks (due to backlog), but they generally are helpful in stating why an article is or is not suitable for publishing in its current state. Yosemiter (talk) 14:56, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Recently-added extreme amount of plot detail in Lego Star Wars video game articles
The other day I noticed that the Lego Star Wars video game articles all had recently added sections called "Plot". They had all added by anonymous users within the past few months. The articles read perfectly competently, and much more succinctly, before they were added. I therefore feel they should be removed, or at the very least, heavily condensed.

The synopses are all disproportionately large compared to the rest of each article. In fact, the synopsis for each film represented in the games is as large as the synopsis you can find on the article for that respective film! The Complete Saga's plot synopsis also consists almost entirely of paragraphs copied from the Lego Star Wars: The Video Game and Lego Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy articles.

This is not a Lego Star Wars wiki, and so this much detail strikes me as being inappropriate, and inconsistent with typical video game articles on Wikipedia. The information in these sections also seems completely unreferenced.

I took it upon myself to remove them, but this was quickly reverted by another user. I therefore feel it would be best to obtain opinions from other users, and obtain a consensus before any further action can be taken.

The articles I am referring to are the following:

Lego Star Wars: The Video Game

Lego Star Wars II: The Original Trilogy

Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga

Lego Star Wars III: The Clone Wars

Lego Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Zigongosaurus1138 (talk) 22:48, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Formatting sets sections in theme articles
When I was doing some drive-by cleanup on Lego Monkie Kid a question came up on how to format the sets section of articles on Lego themes. Should they be in paragraph form like Lego Toy Story and the, or would a bulleted list split into waves make more sense like the current rev of Lego Monkie Kid? jkmartindale (talk) 19:01, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

A-class status for Lego Batman 2: DC Super Heroes
Could someone assess Lego Batman 2: DC Super Heroes for A-class status? elijahpepe@wikipedia 18:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)