This page is within the scope of WikiProject Oceania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Oceania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OceaniaWikipedia:WikiProject OceaniaTemplate:WikiProject OceaniaOceania articles
I think it might be possible to call for having a bot replace the various Melanesia, Micronesia, and Polynesia banners with the Oceania banner at the above page. It might take a while, particularly for articles relevant to more than one of those groups, but it would also probably help draw attention to this group and to maybe get a few more people involved. John Carter (talk) 19:19, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why would you do that? Melanesia/Micronesia/Polynesia projects still exist. Replacement with this banner is effectively declaring war on those wikiprojects. You're immediately orphaning their articles. And they're the more specific project, so they should be the ones tagged for most articles. Adding Oceania banner is fine, replacing their banners requires their consent. (It's been discussed at WP:COUNCIL multiple times about various wikiprojects warring with others) -- 65.92.182.123 (talk) 04:05, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For a start - nothing to do with a war between projects. It is for a start about understanding about project tagging, and category architecture.
If, the actual projects are still sufficientlyactive, there is one way of reading the problem of where in the past - before the Oceania project existed - considerable number of topics/templates/categories - because they were oceania wide - had been incorporated into the various stages of the melanesia and other 'esia' projects as there had been unevenly spread over the oceania region.
As it now stands there is the 'umbrella' project for the whole region - in the same way that the WP:Asia project works - where there are topics/templates/categories/articles that deal with the whole region - they by default can be now attiributed to the wp oceania project. Where items relate to smaller parts of the region such as Australia or other sub components of the larger project - they default to that wikiproject...
My 'reading' of John Carters proposal for the earlier projects that had covered parts of oceania, or the various 'esias' I see as an honest attempt for uniformity. Nothing to do with anything to do with 'war' between the sub projects. A careful examination of what topics the various projects and some earlier forms might have taken may well have covered the islands of the pacific in various ways, I see the proposal as a way of trying to provide a uniform 'umbrella approach'. If in fact current active participants in the various 'esia' projects are able to be careful to re-appraise scope and the various component parts of the oceania region - there may well be reason to re-examine what constitutes each separate sub project - rather than assume there is any intention for 'war'. That is an unfortunate reading. Oceania project was created to create a uniform approach to larger regions similar to what WP:Asia and larger projects - to have a project management capacity for the larger region and the component projects that fit into the larger region. It makes sense for assessment, for tagging of templates and categories, and ultimately with sufficient work - will make sure that orphaned and 'miscellaneous' topics, templates and categories have a 'place' within one or other of the larger projects that encompass their grosser larger regions - in other words the 'capture' makes it a much more manageable approach to smaller regions and subjects that otherwise 'dont seem to belong anywhere'.
Yeah, there was not ever any intention of "declaring war" as the IP put it. It would also be noted that the Oceania banner specifically incorporates assessment criteria for the other projects, and subprojects, like Wikipedia:WikiProject Tuvalu, so that all the assessment data would still be available. And, yeah, like SatuSuro says above, a lot of content relating to Oceania falls within the scope of more than one of the three "regional" projects, and lord knows how many national projects, so if nothing else it might reduce the banner clutter on the article talk pages, which itself might be beneficial if by those doing we might be able to remove the banner box and allow the comparatively few extant banners to be seen more clearly. John Carter (talk) 14:46, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The description given is to replace their banners. This created "wars" at various other wikiprojects that tried this before (if you look at the talk archives of the Council or WPUSA, you'll see what I mean) Replacing a wikiproject's banners with another one's typically causes friction between wikiprojects, if they aren't asked (which I note, did not occur, as I visited the various wikiprojects involved). While the categories and assessments will be carried on, the discussions I have observed in the past resulted in large arguments about the act and consultation process. As for the analogous WPASIA, that doesn't actually sign on the various other projects, it just serves as an umbrella, and signs on to multiregional topics. The various country projects are either signed on individually, or as part of the regional wikiproject (ie. WPSouthEastAsia). I've seen the flamewars that happened at WPUSA when the various US banners were merged together into the WPUSA banner, and it wasn't all that pleasant. This is what I mean by "declaring war". People will get vexed by not having been consulted. Even when consulted, other people will be vexed at being subsumed into someone else's banner. It's better just to plaster an unmissable message at all the subprojects involved, than to forge ahead without asking them for input. -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 12:46, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, just to say this specifically, I support the existence of a WPOCEANIA. I like coordination and umbrella projects, such as WPASIA.
Also, an automated transfer of templates from the existing 3-nesia ones to Oceania would not work, as they would all sign up for Micronesia, Polynesia, Melanesia, because of the current bannering situation, but I rather think that many subjects for which they are bannered may just fall within the local/country project, and not need the regional one as well. -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 12:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, you may be interested in this discussion, about a merged banner and coverage area. -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 12:46, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest that this wikiproject implement the new "Draft"-class and categorize into Category: Draft-Class Oceania articles, for pages in the WP:Drafts namespace that was recently initiated. This would allow tracking of articles related to this wikiproject that are in draft form, which members of this wikiproject may wish to improve and move into the mainspace. -- 76.65.128.112 (talk) 23:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
New Pitcairn mayor - BLP issues
Pitcairn sexual assault trial of 2004, as I don't want to expand the biography to cover that unless I'm sure it's him. There is almost no media coverage of the election - the only thing I can find that suggests it is the same person (apart from the fact that there aren't many people on the island likely to have the same name when the population is <50) is a tweet from the losing candidate claiming the result could be a "media nightmare" for the island. Number57 23:34, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply
]
According to [1], the mayor's full name is Shawn Brent Christian. This is the same name as in the trial.-gadfium 03:38, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So are we ok to assume it's the same person? Number57 18:07, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think we can be sure it is the same person, but what we actually say in the article will need impeccable sourcing.-gadfium 19:23, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[2] should be a suitable source.-gadfium 19:37, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See what you think of what I've added. Thanks for your help too. Number57 20:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good.-gadfium 22:16, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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 Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.