The project now has 28 members! 7 new participants enrolled this week, they can be viewed
here. There was also change to the welcoming messages this month, by
Jza84, which reinvigorated the style in response to the change of colours on the main and affiliated pages. See the welcome templates,
here. Finally, a barnstar has been created for the project! See the final design
on this page, and so far it has been awarded to one lucky participants,
WebHamster. Well done.
Greater Manchester Article News
Well has this month been a hub of activity, or what? (See:
Original diff) The new assessment scale has been welcomed by many here at
WPGM and as of 4th November, 81.37% of all 650 articles have been assessed with both importance and class. Two articles have been passed
good article criteria since last delivery, they are:
Didsbury &
Dunham Massey. Well done to all involved.
Current Debates
There was a lengthy debate over a certain number of related articles in Manchester City Centre this week, (See:
the thread involved). Aytoun Street, Barton Square, Brazenoose Sqaure, Dover Street, Manchester and Police Street were all flagged by
Pit-yacker as being deserved of deletion per lacking
notablilty. The process took 5 days at
articles for deletion and the result was,
delete. Other sections that readied editors into scrambling over themselves this month were: should Greater Manchester boroughs get their own infobox? Such as with
London boroughs.
The debate continutes.
Monthly Challenges
Same as last month, we've have to get Manchester upto Featured Article Standard. However, with Manchester now rated as
A-Class (above GA and below FA) it may be easier than first thought. Try to fill all the current "
to do" requirements. There has also been some talk of increased activity of bringing Greater Manchester to Good Article Standard. It would be ideal if all 650 articles were at least GA standard, but that will never happen in the next month. But please if you can, assess your ability to understand an article and if you're acquauinted with the task in hand and potentially long wait for a writing and for a review, go ahead! Be
bold.
Manchester Airport once again saw more vandal edits this month, and was protected for another consecutive month on 22nd October by
Jmlk17. Some users have also realised the extreme coincidence in the first half of 65% of editing IPs, i.e. all begin with "79.72". Could it be the same editor? If you can keep visiting the page to revert vandalism in sight. The most freqeunt additions that are factually incorrect are the inclusions of: Chicago O'Hare and New York-JFK to Pakistan International Airlines (T2) and Newquay to Air Southwest (T3). MAN also has a
peer review.
Although you may not have noticed that this WikiProject has a associated
portal. The page named,
Portal:North West England, is updated frequently, but it would be nice to get more editors. It too has recently undergone a
peer review, and some criteria has been added to get the page to
featured portal status. You could signify your involvement by adding {{
User Portal NWE}} to your userpage.
That's a beautiful picture. Would you be willing to upload a high-resolution version, suitable for desktop wallpaper use? Thanks,
MattHucke(t) 16:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC).reply
Dear And-Rew, I notice you put a tag on Kalam-e Saranjam. The Kalam-e Saranjam is the main religious book of the Ahl-e Haqq and used by hundreds of thousands of people since the 15th century. It is crucial there be an article about this very important book. References, The Yaresan, by M. Reza Hamzeh'ee, 1990, ISBN:3-922968-83-X--
Persianhistory2008 11:56, 11 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Manchester Airport
Fair enough on restoring information when there is duplicate content elsewhere. When those articles are deleted, we'll likely have to do a survey in terms of the restoration of that content in the main Manchester Airport article. --
Oakshade 16:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Re your comments..
True, I will also invite many of the people whom have voted in the AFD to decide on whether this huge list should be allowed to clutter up an article giving nothing to it.
If you feel you need to resort to extracting users from a specific AfD for vote stacking to push your agenda, that's your prerogative. --
Oakshade 17:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Regarding this response you posted on my talk page...
I want to ensure that a wider range of editors can participate in a debate other than the opinion pushing Airport project.
From your post
here, it appears you mean only inviting the very narrow group who voted on a specific AfD and not at all a "wider range of editors". Just so you are aware of the rules regarding a small cabal of editors trying to change consensus, become familiar with the following passage from
WP:CONSENSUS...
No one person, and no (limited) group of people, can unilaterally declare that community consensus has changed, or that it is fixed and determined.
Word of advice, next time you conspire to gain false consensus with a limited group of deletionists, do it via email so nobody can see your efforts.--
Oakshade 03:56, 15 November 2007 (UTC)reply
The AfD has closed as delete all. I have opened a discussion on the way forward on the talk page. I am also querying policy on this...
Regan123 (
talk) 18:05, 17 November 2007 (UTC)reply
California Trolley
I was trying to put California Trolley in Wikipedia, however it says it will be deleted.
I was trying to edit and add more information about the Trolleybus, and trolley car, etc.
I was just saving my work in case i was kicked offline, etc.
Can i continue to update and edit this article?
Thanks,
Bob
FAC
Hope it succeeds. The article deserves it, and it's a credit to WPGM and you. Regards,
Rudget.
talk 10:25, 18 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Photo notification Done. Thanks for contacting me about that. Best,
Rudget.
talk 18:06, 23 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Amateurliga Nordbaden
Hey And-Rew,
I was still working on this article, just like to save often, thats why it was so small when you tagged it, mate. Maybe don't be so speedy with your speedy delitions. Sorry my friend, next time I will wait a little longer till I save and provide some substance first. Still learning. All the best from here,
EA210269 (
talk) 14:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Firstly, thank you immensly! Yeah, I've got an idea of what to write in Word (the Microsoft thing). I must've forgot to add Manchester to the content of the features section....(*shrugs*) :P. —
Rudgetcontributions 19:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Ah, it's ok about the apology. None needed really. Well, if you believe that would be the best course of action, then I'll support you. Best, —
Rudgetcontributions 19:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Re:Amateurliga Nordbaden
No inconvinience at all, And-Rew. I will try the sandbox, I didn't know what it was for! It may help me greatly because with Football articles it's often easiest to copie the framework accross from a simular one and then just edit it. Thanks for the tip!
EA210269 (
talk) 00:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Wikibreak
Thanks for the Wikibreak tag!... By a terrible coincidence, I crashed and ruined my PC earlier this week and been without internet access (talk about irony!).... I'm semi-up-and-running again, but may take sometime to get back into the swing of things - I've lost alot of important software and data and so ammending this this is my priority for the next few days. Hope all is well, -- Jza84 · (
talk) 02:26, 30 November 2007 (UTC)reply
Sounds great! I don't yet have MSN, but will try to get it tomorrow sometime! Hope to catch up then! -- Jza84 · (
talk) 03:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)reply