Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Netball

Project work
I've just been thinking about a few immediate projects we might be able to start getting going with.


 * I notice a few teams don't have complete final player details yet; this would be good to fix up soon
 * there's still quite a few national teams without articles; perhaps it'd be good to get a least of all of these together and plow through them all
 * does anyone know of any decent sources for player information? It'd be really good if we could get all current (and start thinking about doing past) players, but I'm worried about being able to find good information for those of us without newspaper archive access

Anyway, just some things to start thinking about. Rebecca (talk) 05:19, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I think we need to figure out who is doing what - so far three of us started building a project banner template! (Mine would have been finished except the kids kept me away from the computer all day). As I said on someone's talk page, I'm not much of an expert on the actual game, so I can focus on the project page and templates for now. (Puts in first claim to develop player infobox). dramatic (talk) 09:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You're absolutely right. I'd like to develop some userboxes and invite banners for the project. I've also made a draft main page for the project at User:Liveste/Netball, for which I've tried to incorporate ideas from different editors. Let me know what you think. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 12:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Would anyone mind if we used my abovementioned draft? If there are no major objections, I'll go ahead and revise the main page tomorrow. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 04:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it's a great start - nice work! Rebecca (talk) 13:04, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks nice Matt (talk) 21:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback. I've revised the main page as stated. Anyone can make whatever changes they want, whether it be small, large or total. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 01:25, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Would it be possible to find space in this for a to-do list? I'd like to start picking off the most notable topics with articles, with a goal towards (in the not-too-distant future) at least having articles on every ANZ championship player, every national team, and every national competition team. Rebecca (talk) 10:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. Something like that could go wherever you'd like, but preferably in between the "Scope" and "Selected article" sections when editing the page. There are a lot of small sections that can be moved around to accommodate it, or another section could be added if needed. Cheers again. – Liveste (talk • edits) 01:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Is there any chance you could make up a new format for the to-do list? The general tempate is next to useless for our project, because we're starting from such a low base: there's barely anything to assess, most of the existing articles could do with some work, and most of the work we still need is in writing articles. It'd be really good if we could have a section for each area in which we need articles: national teams, domestic teams, and biographies being the three most glaring holes. Rebecca (talk) 07:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Assessing article importance
We also need to determine what articles are of "top" importance to the WikiProject (remembering that we're supposed to be an international collaborative effort) and what are of "low" importance, as well as everything in between. Here are a few of my suggestions, but they're far from complete. Comments welcome. Not quite sure where to put elite domestic (or multi-national) competitions and their teams. Same problem for biographies. Should we have an underlying philosophy to determine importance? Again, thoughts welcome. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 13:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I would put the elite competitions in High and their teams in Mid, and players in low (this should generally be pyramid-shaped. There might be criteria for putting the top 20% of players in mid. What would that equate to in years of elite competition or number of internationals? dramatic (talk) 19:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I've compiled a draft importance scale below. If everyone agrees, I'll add this scheme to the assessment department page within 48 hours. Using this, we can assess netball-related articles fairly consistently, instead of leaving them as unassessed. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 01:15, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

That looks sensible. Am I good to start classifying articles by importance? Matt (talk) 04:18, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The sooner the better. – Liveste (talk • edits) 04:28, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Lania Barrett-Chasse
We have two articles on her at different spellings - google was no help in determining which spelling is correct. dramatic (talk) 02:48, 13 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Player profiles on both the Southern Steel and ANZ Championship websites list her name as Liana Barrett-Chase. A google search of this name gives more substantial output. I'll redirect both pages to this title now. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 05:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

ANZ Championship statistics
In the ANZ Championship, teams that have equal points on the ladder are sorted by "goal percentage". Currently, this statistic isn't released on the Internet until about a week after matches are played. I'm guessing that this statistic would be included in post-match analyses on telecasts, so I'd like to ask if anyone watching match telecasts can also note either the goal percentages for each team or, even better, the number of shots at goal attempted. I'm asking because I'd like to include goal percentages on the ANZ Championship Season 2008 Ladder template (which could probably do with a rename), but having to wait a week for these statistics would make a mockery of an "updated" table. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 04:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think I have pay TV access, but I'll have to check sometime. I think it's worth having an updated table, even if it takes a week to adjust, anyway. Rebecca (talk) 13:04, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * These statistics are frustrating! On one hand, the ANZ Championship website is now releasing the goal percentage statistics a lot sooner. But on the other, the (cumulative) goal percentages for each team don't all correspond with their positions on the ladder; they also don't exactly match the statistics on post-match telecast analyses.


 * The ANZ Championship site specifically names the goal percentage statistic as the first piece of information used to sort teams on the ladder with equal points. I'm assuming that they're referring to cumulative goal percentage, which as I understand it (correct me if I'm wrong), equals cumulative "goals scored" divided by cumulative "goals attempted", multiplied by 100. Assuming that this is correct, then the Southern Steel should be fifth on the ladder at the end of Round 2, and not seventh as the website (and other websites) have published. I'm guessing that I've missed something, but I don't know what that could be. Any ideas? – Liveste (talk • edits) 01:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The ANZ Championship website now publishes goal percentage stats straight after each game. It appears that goal percentage = "100 × goals scored / goals conceded". This correlates well with the ladder, and so I've added this stat. – Liveste (talk • edits) 12:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

"Notability"
At the bottom of many pages, there are "notable players". Presummably this is more notable that the notability required to end up on Wikipedia in the first place so it is a matter of degree. Do we have/want any loose guidance on a definition? I propose (without too much thinking) these things might equal notability:
 * Being in a place winning team more than once
 * Breaking a record for anything
 * The "other" category; being in a team for ages, getting a lot of press/sponsorship etc.

These criteria maybe exist somewhere else (and more well thought out than my ones). Any thoughts?

Matt (talk) 03:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Presumably, this would correlate to the "high notability" that we used (but did not define) for the "Assessing article importance" discussion.

Maybe I am being too pedantic

Matt (talk) 03:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Pedantic? Not at all. Defining "high-profile/notability" would be helpful, particularly when assessing biographies that may be "borderline high-profile". For mine, I think that a high profile requires significant coverage in reliable publications and widespread recognition over many years (say five years, to arbitrarily throw in a number), compared with other players. Significant coverage and recognition is usually the natural result of a player achieving many wins, breaking records or receiving honours. I wonder if we should come up with some examples of high-profile players, to which other players can be compared.


 * One other thing: how many articles have "Notable players" at the bottom of the page? The only one of relevance I can think of is Netball. I've always thought of the list on that article as being a bit too subjective, and I've actually been thinking about moving the list to a separate article. Thoughts? – Liveste (talk • edits) 12:19, 1 May 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 )  21:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Netball
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 23:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Collaboration?
I've noticed that some of the progress on netball articles has slipped off a bit since the bit of the ANZ Championship season, and was wondering if people would be interested in trying to kick things off again with something new. I was thinking maybe trying to get the national team articles up to speed (which are pretty dismal apart from Aus and NZ) or trying to expand the articles on some prominent players? Rebecca (talk) 07:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the late response. I'm all for kick-starting things again. I think to start off, we should finalise improvements to the Netball article before submitting a copy to the Wikipedia 0.7 team, which is due on 20 October (sounds like undergrad all over again :). I think we'd have a good chance of getting some of the more high-profile players and national teams to GA or even FA (e.g., Cynna Kydd), because there's probably more information out there about them. And as you suggested, the articles on other national teams are in desperate need of expansion as well, so we should probably work on them too. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 23:28, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Milestone Announcements
I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 (t, c) 22:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

ANZ Championship articles
The ANZ Championship starts in just over a month, so I've been trying to fix up some of our articles on the subject. Some ANZ Championship teams now have squad and season info from multiple seasons in the one article. I've been wondering if we shouldn't just make individual season articles for each team – e.g., 2009 Northern Mystics season. They do this with WNBA teams, e.g., 2008 Washington Mystics season, and I think there's enough information on ANZ Championship teams to include details on off-season player transfers, staff changes, season results and game stats. I also like the WNBA player roster templates (e.g., Washington Mystics roster) and think they could be usefully adapted to netball articles. What does everyone else think? Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 08:26, 26 February 2009 (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 06:07, 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} 09:28, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Are there enough articles on this subject to justify an Outline of netball?
Here's a discussion about subject development you might find interesting.

The Transhumanist 23:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

GAN backlog reduction - Sports and recreation
As you may know, we currently have 400 good article nominations, with a large number of them being in the sports and recreation section. As such, the waiting time for this is especially long, much longer than it should be. As a result of this, I am asking each sports-related WikiProject to review two or three of these nominations. If this is abided by, then the backlog should be cleared quite quickly. Some projects nominate a lot but don't review, or vice-versa, and following this should help to provide a balance and make the waiting time much smaller so that our articles can actually get reviewed! Wizardman 23:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Popular pages
I have requested a list of "popular pages" for WikiProject Netball at. If approved, this will tell us which netball-related articles are the most viewed in any given month, and thus where we should probably focus any article improvement efforts. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 02:59, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Pageview stats
After a recent request, I added WikiProject Netball 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 Netball/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 00:39, 1 December 2009 (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) 03:41, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living people articles bot
Okip  00:27, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Sports Notability
There is discussion ongoing at Wikipedia_talk:BIO debating possible changes to the WP:ATHLETE notability guideline. As a result, some have suggested using WP:NSPORT as an eventual replacement for WP:ATHLETE. Editing has begun at WP:NSPORT, please participate to help refine the notability guideline for the sports covered by this wikiproject. —Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 03:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Injury icon in team rosters
Currently some netball articles use Injury icon 2.svg or similar in team rosters to mark injured players. There are many problems associated with this, as listed for example here. To me, this seems to be in violation of another Wikipedia guideline, namely because the red cross has its separate legitimate purpose. Additionally, the symbol is regulated by international and US federal laws ( ao. and ), and that might cause problems. Note that even if the use of the image might be legal in the US, it might not be elsewhere.

Is there a chance that another image (such as an adhesive bandage, a wheel chair or a star of life) or a relevant abbreviation (INJ, IR, ...) could be used to mark injured players? Alternatively, the injured players could be left unmarked. --SaMi ✉ 17:42, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Injury icons were added to ANZ Championship rosters for teams that, because of a player sustaining significant injury or becoming pregnant, apply for a Temporary Replacement Player. Selection of TRPs are subject to restrictions (more so in New Zealand), and once selected these players also become listed in the roster as a "thirteenth player" (standard teams at elite level comprise 12 players). This is different from players who are sidelined with injury, and so far I'm not convinced that this usage violates WP:RECENT, WP:NOTNEWS or the abovementioned MOS:ICON section (I'll keep an eye on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football). Sources for these replacements are easy to find, and I can add them to articles if necessary.


 * I wasn't aware that the red cross image had its own legally specified use. Barring a blanket ban on the use of injury icons on Wikipedia sports rosters, then a star-of-life icon would be suitable. It kinda resembles the asterisk currently used for pregnant players (using a red cross for pregnant players would have been a tad insensitive), and the star of life can probably be used in both cases. Cheers. – Liveste (talk • edits) 00:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I've replaced the red cross icons with stars of life. Let me know if there are further problems. Cheers again. – Liveste (talk • edits) 01:58, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Netball 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 Netball 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 23:23, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing
I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 20:29, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Women's sport wikiproject
I have proposed that we create a WikiProject devoted to Women's sport: WikiProject Council/Proposals/Women's Sport. John Vandenberg (chat) 10:41, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Netball article: Netball around the world
One thought for the global section: Create daughter articles for each region that IFNA has: Netball in the Americas, Netball in Asia, Netball in Europe, Netball in Oceania and Netball in Africa. If we structure it that way, then the leads for those sections can be cited and put back in Netball. The added advantage to this is it might encourage the improvement of the netball by country articles and feed down the line for other articles. Plus, we can make it a netball project goal to get say all the region articles to good status at some point in the future. But yeah, as an interim solution, creating daughter articles for each region seems like a good idea to me. Once written and stubbed out, leads can be created and put back into the main article if that sounds okay with other contributors to this article and WikiProject Netball? --LauraHale (talk) 03:30, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Netball clubs and leagues in southern Australia
In Victoria and southern NSW at least, many local netball clubs and competitions have amalgamated with their associated Australian rules football teams, i.e. Tocumwal Football Club and Tocumwal Netball Club are now Tocumwal Football Netball Club and enter teams in both the local Australian rules football and netball competitions (which are often amalgamated as well) See the website of the Ovens & Murray Football League here for an example of this phenomenon.

The discussion at Talk:Riverina Football League is an attempt to see if there is consensus to rename these types of articles. A follow-up question: should the scope of these articles be widened to include netball? Your views are welcome. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 04:46, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Netball squad player
Template:Netball squad player has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. DH85868993 (talk) 08:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Good article reassessment
I have initiated a community reassessment of an article that might be of interest to this project, Netball and the Olympic Movement. The reassessment can be found here. AIR corn (talk) 08:40, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

RfC on the use of flag icons for sportspeople
An RfC discussion about the MOS:FLAG restriction on the use of flag icons for sportspeople has been opened at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons. We invite all interested participants to provide their opinion here. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:40, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Portal:Sports is up for featured portal consideration
This is a courtesy message to inform the members of this project that I have nominated Portal:Sports for featured portal status. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Sports. The featured portal criteria are at Featured portal criteria. Please feel free to weigh in.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  18:37, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

How to play netball
WEll there aew 7 players and they pass around a ball and stuff and then there are different players with different positions — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.94.157.82 (talk) 03:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Popular pages tool update
As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at ~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man ) 05:18, 23 February 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)

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)

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: 18:04, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

RFC on sports notability
An RFC has recently been started regarding a potential change to the notability guidelines for sportspeople. Please join in the conversation. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 23:08, 5 May 2017 (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)

Discussion at NSPORTS
Hello all. In an effort to finally resolve the never-ending and annoying GNG v SSG issue, I've proposed a revision of the NSPORTS introduction. You are all invited to take part in the discussion. Thank you. Jack &#124; talk page 06:20, 20 September 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  11:00, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Netball at the 2019 Pacific Games
Is anyone interested in creating an article for Netball at the 2019 Pacific Games, based on the 2015 page? Any help appreciated! -- Ham105 (talk) 10:52, 15 July 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)

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) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Netball
Netball has been nominated for a 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. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:42, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

FAR for Cynna Kydd
I have nominated Cynna Kydd for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 14:55, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Netball
Netball has been nominated for a 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. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:41, 20 September 2023 (UTC)