Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Luxembourg/Archive 1

New lists
I have changed the criterion for inclusion of new lists. Now, all lists created in the past two months are eligible (rather than the previous one month). This was for two reasons: One must note that, by the standards of other WikiProjects, the criteria for the two 'new item' lists are still very restrictive. However, I have faith that there turnover will be high enough to keep the two lists ticking over. If someone wants to further relax the requirements, it only has to be proposed. Bastin 13:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) There aren't enough lists created to justify a one month list.
 * 2) Many lists are 'link banks', creating red links that can then be addressed by the creation of new articles.  By increasing the profile of lists, which can be achieved by this loosening of the criterion, these red links can be eroded more quickly.

Provisional style conventions
I've just posted a list of provisional conventions to be adopted for the WikiProject. If you consider one or more of the provisional conventions to be inappropriate, you can do so here. They won't be adopted as permanent conventions for a while, so they'll be plenty of scope to amend them. Bastin 12:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


 * As far a style conventions go, I would suggest adding the removal of any reference to "luxembourgian" a phrase I never heard when I lived in luxembourg... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Teutanic (talk • contribs) 16:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC).


 * I agree with above comment. The term "Luxembourgian" is only used by people who know nothing about Luxembourg. "Luxembourgish" is the most commonly used adjective. It's also used as the English for Lëtzebuergesch. I lived in Luxembourg for several years. geraldkelly 19 May 2007


 * I also agree - I have family from Luxembourg and have never heard the word "Luxembourgian" before. I was always taught to use "Luxembourgeois" as both the language and the adjective, though "Luxembourgish" seems more popular nowadays. And I think we can make a case for using "Luxembourg" as an adjectival noun, as in "the Luxembourg Parliament". Yorkie27 8 July 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yorkie27 (talk • contribs) 09:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The current edition of the Guardian style guide lists "Luxembourgeois" as the demonym. There is nothing about what the adjective should be. OED.com lists luxembourgeois as the adjective and demonym and luxembourgish as the language. Google hits for luxembourgish: 2 million. Hits for luxembourgian: 105,000. For these reasons and the fact that in 7 years i lived there i never heard anyone who lived there describe anything as "luxembourgian", i am changing the style convention. 137.222.230.13 (talk) 16:08, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The above comment is by me. As was the edit. I have been logged out for some time now, Lord knows how I failed to notice...Teutanic (talk) 17:10, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

My edit to the style guide was reverted because it was 'unilateral' and anonymous. First anonymity is no reason to revert an edit. Second, this talk page seems to give some credence to the idea that the edit had the support of at least some people. No dissenting voice has yet explained why 'Luxembourgian' should continue to be the suggested adjective. I accept that consistency is to be valued, but being consistently wrong is hardly a noble aim. Teutanic (talk) 15:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, anonimity is no reason for reversion, but an edit by an anonymous user who is changeing a project's style guide without explaining why may be considered dubious.--Caranorn (talk) 17:45, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The explanation of the above (admittedly unsigned) post I think warranted the change. I am going to change the style guide again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Teutanic (talk • contribs) 12:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Tagging talk pages and assessing articles
Hi. If you still have work to do tagging talk pages and assessing articles, my AWB plugin might be of interest to you.

The plugin has two main modes of operation:
 * Tagging talk pages, great for high-speed tagging
 * Assessments mode, for reviewing articles (pictured)

As of the current version, WikiProjects with simple "generic" templates are supported by the plugin without the need for any special programatic support by me. I've had a look at your project's template and you seem to qualify.

For more information see:
 * About the plugin
 * About support for "generic" WikiProject templates
 * User guide
 * About AWB (AutoWikiBrowser)

Hope that helps. If you have any questions or find any bugs please let me know on the plugin's talk page. --Kingboyk 13:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Project directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the 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 that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. 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 16:57, 25 October 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 21:30, 29 December 2006 (UTC)