add site
services
publishers
database
health videos
toolbar
stats
live show
health store
more stuff
JOIN/LOGIN
| advertise add site services publishers database health videos
| | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
Talking Watch, Talking Watches, Talking Clock, Talking Bible, Talking... independentliving.com | Hazards Of Your Top 10 Most Popular Foods | Most Favorite Foods |... healthyyounaturally.com | Cell Culture Services for Bacteria, Cell banking, Bacterial Culture,... biologicspd.com |
[edit] Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for WikiProject Popular CultureWikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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 22:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC) [edit] Half-smokeHello, I am looking for some advise on a sub section I recently created, and was deleted, from this article. This is my single edit to the article in question. It involves President-elect Obama not knowing what the half-smoke was and Bill Cosby joking he would take his vote back b/c of it. I think some the members of this WikiProject might be able to offer me some advise as to whether or not this information is pertinent. To be clear I'm not looking for an "Attaboy" or a rubber stamp but serious consideration as to if this adds to the article or not. As a note I now realize I should have called the sub-section "In popular culture" a mistake I won't repeat in the future. Thanks Naufana : talk 02:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Where oh where has my trivia section gone?Has everyone read this page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Trivia_and_Popular_Culture/Discussion Here are some interesting external web sites concering trivia. http://www.neatorama.com/2008/03/22/wikipedias-identity-crisis-keep-or-delete-trivia/ http://billso.com/2008/03/18/should-wikipedia-include-trivia/ http://www.economist.com/search/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10789354 http://www.economist.com/search/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10789354&mode=comment&intent=readBottom http://www.economist.com/search/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10789354&mode=comment&intent=readBottom http://www.includipedia.com/blog/2008/03/10/inclusionists-versus-deletionists-on-wikipedia.html http://www.includipedia.com/wiki/Includipedia:About http://www.includipedia.com/wiki/Main_Page http://www.impactlab.com/2008/03/24/wikipedia-identity-crisis-part-2-keep-or-delete-trivia/ http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080111152140AA8xEth http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiTrivia Ozmaweezer (talk) 04:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC) [edit] All's quiet on the trivia frontIt seems that over the past 4 or 5 months or so, all the excitement about trivia and popular culture seems to have died down, and it looks as if the problem is slowly resolving itself. New wording to {{trivia}} make the template less abrasive and more subtle in it's guidance, and additionally the creation of {{in popular culture}} has created a more problem specific template for certain sections. However, it seems that while this WikiProject was successful in stemming the giant tide of AfDs and categorical removal, it still stands a long way between making articles acceptable, and making articles flourish. There is still a significant problem with IPC articles that really shouldn't exist, and this lowers the average quality of IPC articles. Quite a few articles under this project's scope should be cleaned up and merged with their parent articles, since the topics often do not meet the criteria for a stand alone article. I'd encourage anyone with some spare time to take a look at this project's Article Statistics, and see if you can improve the overall quality of our scope by integrating unnecessary articles. --NickPenguin(contribs) 17:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Coordinators' working groupHi! 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. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC) [edit] News and updatesFollowing the lead of other wikiprojects, I have created an article assessment instructions page. If anyone has an opinion on this page... as always, feel free to make some edits or discuss any changes on the talk page. Also, the old project banner has been replaced by a new metabanner template which simplifies both the coding of new banners and making any new changes to old banners. Happy editing. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 21:38, 1 March 2009 (UTC) [edit] Article alertsThis 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 Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here. Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:34, 15 March, 2009 (UTC) [edit] Project scopeI have recently discovered an article - Teardrop tattoo, and oddly enough there is no wikiproject tattoo so I thought it would be a good addition to our scope. Articles such as 555 (telephone number), Urban legend, and such are hard to define as "pop culture" and may well be within the scope of other potential projects which do not currently exist. But I think these are important additions as most of these articles are very notable topics which are usually orphaned (no projects attached) and need a lot of editing help. Merry St. Patrick's Day. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 02:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC) [edit] TOO MANY CAPITAL LETTERSIt seems as if half the time when I find a "popular culture" section, it says
with a capital "P" and a capital "C", in disregard of Wikipedia:Manual of Style, which clear prescribes lower case:
Now I find there's a WikiProject devoted to popular culture references. Is this project (1) doing something to get people to comply with WP:MOS; or (2) doing something that makes them disregard WP:MOS; or (3) other (specfify)? Michael Hardy (talk) 22:45, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
You miss the point. I wasn't criticizing the capitalization of the name of the project, but rather: headings within articles. And you are wrong. Wikipedia:Manual of Style exists. Its existence matters. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:52, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
The reason I "single them out" is precisely what I said above: the high frequency with which I find the all-capital-initials headings. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC) The answer is (3). We're not trying to "make people comply with the MoS" -- that's not the purpose of this project. When I personally do work on pop-culture sections and articles (and, heck, every other kind of article), I fix capitalization. I expect other project members do as well. But are we poring through Wikipedia's articles, trying to find miscapitalized "pop culture" sections? Not specifically. It doesn't strike me as the most pressing task facing us, or the most effective use of our time. Have you considered trying AWB, if this is a project you personally are interested in undertaking?--Father Goose (talk) 08:09, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
[edit] We now have a featured list!Not that I can take credit for it. I noticed List of cultural references in The Cantos, which definitely falls under this project's scope, so I added it. Yay. We also have the former featured list Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc -- if someone would be willing to clean up the unsourced entries, we could get it back on WP:FL.--Father Goose (talk) 01:22, 27 March 2009 (UTC) [edit] Shinigami in popular cultureShinigami in popular culture has been nomianted for deletion at AfD 76.66.202.139 (talk) 06:09, 7 May 2009 (UTC) [edit] Article bisectionNote Pan and Pan in popular culture, ditto Bugbear, Phoenix (mythology), Redcap, and Knife fight - I am trying to find the policy which states this isn't a good idea, but haven't the time for an MOS search. Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC) PS: I proposed a merge back of Bugbears in popular culture into Bugbear - discuss at Talk:Bugbear#Merger_proposal. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC) Also Sprites in popular culture into Sprite (creature), join the fun at Talk:Sprite_(creature)#Merger_proposal Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:32, 15 May 2009 (UTC) [edit] GA Sweeps invitationThis 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) 05:57, 20 May 2009 (UTC) [edit] HMS PinaforeThis article has a Cultural Impact section that I think is a pretty good one, because all of the examples mentioned are very substantial references to the opera - for example, where characters in a TV show sing a song from HMS Pinafore. But it has been attacked by some editors as WP:Trivia. I am about to nominate the article for promotion to Featured Article. Can someone who has experience with WP:Featured Articles help me make a really clean argument that the section is not a collection of trivia, but rather is important information about how the subject has affected popular culture for over 100 years? Or, on the other hand, if you disagree, let me know. Also, if you can think of a way to improve the section so that it reads better, please let me know. Thanks for any help! -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:39, 23 May 2009 (UTC) [edit] Satyrs in popular cultureSatyrs in popular culture has been nominated for deletion. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 06:07, 5 June 2009 (UTC) [edit] Tang in popular cultureTang in popular culture has been nominated for deletion. It was recently split from the main article. 70.29.210.174 (talk) 04:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC) [edit] Featured list review noticeI have nominated List of cultural references in The Cantos for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.--Gimme danger (talk) 20:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC) [edit] Long time no seeI've been so busy with other things, its been a while since I've devoted any time to improving project articles. Anyway, I came across this today: Olly olly oxen free, with a long list of pop culture references and absolutely zero cites. On another note, I've been working on my series of Trucking industry in the United States articles, possibly working my way toward a WP:Featured topic, which means massive amounts of work. One editor suggested that a pop culture article about truckers in the United States would be a welcome addition, seeing as how there should be plenty of third party sources regarding this subject. And he is right, there are plenty of them. So whenver I get a chance I'm going to create the article, my only problem is what to call it. United States truck drivers in popular culture, Cultural depictions of truck drivers (United States), Truck drivers in the United States in popular culture (hmm, too long?), or maybe Truck drivers in popular culture (United States). Anyone got any ideas? --ErgoSum•talk•trib 19:33, 22 June 2009 (UTC) [edit] Vercingetorix in popular cultureVercingetorix in popular culture has been prodded for deletion 70.29.208.69 (talk) 03:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC) [edit] IconsNew article Icons of American culture, as yet just a stub, is in need of feedback: comments and contributions from anyone interested. ProfDEH (talk) 19:36, 2 August 2009 (UTC) [edit] popular culture sectionsThere has been a recent increase in the removal of in popular culture and in fiction sections from numerous articles, along with the rapid nomination of many ipc articles for deletion. I am somewhat puzzled, for I thought we had all reached a consensus that such was accepted as content. Perhaps consensus is changing--or perhaps there is a small dedicated group determined to drive such change during a slow period at Wikipedia. If the general view has changed, then so be it, but I'm not convinced of that. The best response, of course, is to improve and source this material properly. It won't prevent people for trying to remove them, but it will help convince the community that they ought to stay in. Some of the sections and articles are in urgent need of some work. I've started upgrading, but I cannot do it all. (I did not list here the ones that I thought were altogether hopeless, or too small to bother with at all). It is not argument, but sourcing and fuller content that will do the job. As for ipc, see the appropriate sections of: (Some of the arguments for removing the sections use the argument that if an article on the ipc was deleted, the section ought not remain at all. )
and the AfDs for: and the recreated article DGG (talk) 03:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC) [edit] Trivia questionsI've been googling for free trivia questions, like ones in Trivial Pursuit but haven't found anything significant collection. So I thought, why not put together some as a Wikimedia project, for example as a page in Wikiversity? Or is there already something like that somewhere? Mikael Häggström (talk) 14:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC) [edit] Silver SurferSilver Surfer has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. Tom B (talk) 19:18, 16 August 2009 (UTC) [edit] Bad linking practices: infoboxes and common termsI'm sure it's no secret that popular music articles, many of which contain references to guitars, are badly overlinked. Common term and generalised linking is now not the normal practice, and need specific rationale. This includes the linking of the general common terms such as "guitar", "singer", "songwriter", "author", "poet", "activist", whether in main text or infobox. I have been auditing the linking, slowly, in a few popular culture articles. Unfortunately, a member of the guitar WikiProject has been reverting tese audits WRT infoboxes. The reasons given have ranged from:
There is also a sense that infoboxes should be carpeted blue for aesthetic reasons: the last is clearly an abuse of wikilinking, which loses its effect if every word is blue. Infoboxes are, in any case, a mixture of black and blue, and always will be. The question becomes to what extent the useful links should stand out rather than being swamped. A related issue is the style-guide rule discouraging adjacent links, and encouraging specific linking. "Guitar", for example, would be much better unlinked at the top, and if the artist played a certain type of guitar, Guitar#Types of guitars is the better target, in the appropriate section. This is what would help the readers, not a formulaic carpet-bombing of infoboxes with double square brackets. Times have changed. Apart from going against WP:LINK, this practice is diluting the many important, valuable links in popular culture articles. Among these are, of course, the titles of songs, albums and other artists. These should not be diluted by links that are not useful to an understanding of the topic, and that all English-speakers should know the definition of. (I have unlinked "roses", "divorce", "suicide", and many other dictionary words, as well as the seemingly formulaic "singer", "musician", "artist", "activist", etc.). I ask that editors take the opportunity to support the cleaning up of the "sea of blue" problem to make wikilinking in popular-culture articles work a lot better for our readers. Tony (talk) 03:05, 6 September 2009 (UTC) [edit] Question about external links to pop cultureA question at Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard#Linking_to_a_wiki_for_pop_culture_references might benefit from the perspective of people at this project. In particular, if a list of pop culture/'trivia' items is inappropriate for the Wikipedia encyclopedia, should it be moved to another website (e.g., Wikia), and if so, should the usual rules about WP:External links be "ignored" to permit a link to the relocated content? WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:47, 26 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] Proposed move of History of cats to Cultural depictions of catsA heads up - I have proposed History of cats be moved to Cultural depictions of cats — This article is really about cat culture and folklore through the ages rather than history per se. I am not saying there shouldn't be an article on the history of cats, but this ain't it. My suggestion would be to move this to Cultural depictions of cats. Additionally I think I have the sources to make it a Good Article one day....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:11, 29 October 2009 (UTC) [edit] VP discussion noticeDiscussion relevant to the project: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Any_.28reasonable.29_objections.3F --Cybercobra (talk) 02:07, 11 December 2009 (UTC) [edit] New MemberI'm new to the Project, just thought I'd introduce myself. Sean (talk || contribs) 04:35, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
| ||||||||||||||||
| ↑ top of page ↑ | about thumbshots |
