Jump to content

Wikipedia:Collaboration of the week/Archive: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Eleassar777 (talk | contribs)
5,229 edits
please note: as there were no objections on the talk page, I changed the policy of voting
Line 215: Line 215:
----
----


===[[Military]] (May 7)===
===[[Military]] (May 14)===
:''Nominated [[April 30]] [[2005]]; needs 5 votes by [[May 7]] [[2005]]''
:''Nominated [[April 30]] [[2005]]; needs 10 votes by [[May 14]] [[2005]]''
'''Support:'''
'''Support:'''
# [[User:BanyanTree|<nowiki></nowiki>]][[User:BanyanTree|Banyan]][[User talk:BanyanTree|Tree]] 16:28, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
# [[User:BanyanTree|<nowiki></nowiki>]][[User:BanyanTree|Banyan]][[User talk:BanyanTree|Tree]] 16:28, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:06, 6 May 2005

Shortcut

Each week a Collaboration of the Week will be picked using this page. This is a specific topic which either has no article or a basic stub page, the aim being to have a featured-standard article by the end of the week, from widespread cooperative editing.

The project aims to fill gaps in Wikipedia, to give users a focus and to give us all something to be proud of. Anyone can nominate an article and can vote for the nominated articles. Every Sunday the votes are tallied, and the winner will be promoted for a week to potential contributors.

Collaborations
Articles
Science and technology
Miscellaneous

The next winner will be selected on Sunday, May 8, 18:00 (UTC). The current date and time is 20:38, June 17, 2025.
Previous winners can be found at /History.
Removed nominations can be found at /Removed.

Selecting the next Collaboration of the Week

  • Voting
    • Please vote for three candidates at most.
    • Users are allowed to vote only for those candidates that were nominated after they had registered.
    • To enter your votes, simply edit the appropriate sections by just inserting a new line with "# ~~~~". This will add your username and a time stamp in a new numbered list item.
    • A vote will be taken to include a pledge that the voter will contribute to the article if it is selected.
    • Please add only support votes. Opposing votes will not affect the result, as the winner is simply the one with the most support votes (see Approval voting).
  • Tie-breakers
    • In case of a tie, voting will be extended for 24 hours. If there is still a tie, the candidate that was nominated first wins.
The path to a featured article
  • Nominations
    • New nominations can be made at any time and should be added at the end of this page. Please use the template at the bottom of this page.
    • If the page you are nominating already exists, please add {{COTW}} to the top of its talk page. This expands to:

Template:COTW

  • Considerations for nominations
    • Please only nominate articles which don't currently exist or are stubs. (Two paragraphs or less of information or fewer than 1,000 characters)
    • For non-stubs, submitting the article to Article improvement drive, pages needing attention, cleanup, peer review, or requests for expansion may be more appropriate.
    • Giving reasons as to why an article should become the COTW may assist others in casting their vote.
    • Can the wider community easily contribute to the article? Or is it something only a small number of people will know about?
  • Pruning
    • The nomination will be moved to /Removed if it has not received 5 votes after 7 days on the list, 10 votes after 14 days, 15 votes after 21 days, and so on. Essentially, an article needs to get 5 nominations a week until the Sunday on which it has the most votes.

Candidates for next week

If an article wins, please add {{COTWnow}} to the top of the article, which will show up as: Template:COTWnow Also add {{subst:COTWvoter}} ~~~~ (please remember that to add "subst" at the beginning) to the talk pages of all the people who voted for the current COTW winner.

Culture of Rome (May 10)

Nominated April 5 2005; needs 25 votes by May 10 2005

Support:

  1. Wonderfool t(c)e) 08:58, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  2. Eleassar777 19:14, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  3. Hippalus 17:42, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
  4. Bremen 18:55, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  5. gren 20:14, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  6. Christopher 00:33, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
  7. Ganymead 02:52, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  8. olivier 12:30, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
  9. bogdan ʤjuʃkə | Talk 15:44, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  10. Dhartung | Talk 18:11, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  11. Zocky 14:42, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  12. —Charles P. (Mirv) 22:55, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  13. Pyromonkeykw 11:11, 17 Apr 2005
  14. Junes 10:02, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  15. --Canoeguy81 18:08, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  16. eric ✈ 05:05, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
  17. Tony Jin | (talk) 00:36, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
  18. Dalf | Talk 23:43, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Mihoshi 17:46, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  20. --Bhadani 19:00, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  21. Stancel 19:54, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: Was a candidate before, did very well in votes but still looks poor, fancy that it could go all the way this time--Wonderfool t(c)e) 08:58, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Looks poor? That is absolutely the understatement of the week. Right now, it isn't even an article, it is a list!--Hippalus 17:44, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
  • This badly needs some help
  • I support this nomination, although I'm not sure whether Ancient Rome (see nomination below) isn't more urgent. Zocky 14:42, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • The article doesn't adress that there's still a city called Rome with a culture that's very much alive. Also, Rome was pretty important not only in ancient times but throughout history. Maybe this should be called Culture of Ancient Rome? On the other hand, for many people Rome equates to Ancient Rome. Junes 10:02, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • I also think that would be a good idea; focusing on the culture of the Roman Empire. Maybe it we should rename it to "Culture of the Roman Empire" or something similar? Or have an article on the ancient aspects of Roman culture, and an article on the medieval & modern aspects as well. Christopher 20:39, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)

Ancient Rome (May 11)

Nominated April 13 2005; needs 20 votes by May 11 2005

Support:

  1. Zocky 02:50, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  2. SimonP 14:57, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
  3. ALoan (Talk) 11:19, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  4. Lupin 20:27, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  5. --Wonderfool t(c)e) 10:15, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  6. Tony Jin | (talk) 20:37, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
  7. Mondhir 21:46, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  8. Junes 09:56, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  9. Canoeguy81 18:09, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  10. --Newnoise 17:36, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  11. kaal 22:16, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  12. Ganymead 00:58, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  13. Mgm|(talk) 10:41, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
  14. Justinhoude 12:20, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)
  15. gren 00:16, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  16. nick 17:16, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  17. Sobriquet 03:50, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:32, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Zoso 01:43, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid votes:

  1. --67.161.115.23 09:16, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Comments:

  • We have a decent category:Ancient Rome and articles about the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, yet, amazingly, we don't have an overview article about ancient Rome and its history. The natural place to put it would be Ancient Rome, which is linked from hundreds of articles and which is now a redirect to the rather unwieldy List of Ancient Rome-related topics. Zocky 02:50, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Given the amount of material we already have, this should be easy. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:19, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • I vigorously support this. One of the main problems with Wikipedia is that blue-chip entries get the short end of the stick while attention is lavished on contemporary entries like Bush, climate change, &c. Let's give the Encyclopedia Britannica a run for its money on this one!
  • Redirected to a list? Bah! Zocky is very right with his assesment indeed. Mgm|(talk) 10:41, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

Airport (May 14)

Nominated April 16 2005; needs 20 votes by May 14 2005

Support:

  1. Burgundavia 11:46, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Tony Jin | (talk) 23:59, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
  3. eric 01:02, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC) - Could definitely use some fresh eyes.
  4. Bremen 02:11, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  5. Ganymead 08:31, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  6. RJH 19:24, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  7. Ceejayoz 04:28, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  8. Nick2588 02:02, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  9. Thesidewinder 05:00, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  10. 500LL 20:43, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
  11. --Zxcvbnm 23:15, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  12. AnyFile 15:50, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  13. N-Mantalk 17:39, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  14. Dalf | Talk 23:44, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Trevor macinnis 01:25, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  16. pmam21talkarticles 07:43, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Comments:

  • This section is looking bare...it's funny...no comments but 16 votes. I guess everyone agrees it just needs to be done. Bremen 14:41, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • It could use material on paved landing strips and keeping the runway clean; the meaning of all those funny signs along the taxi strips as well as various lights; de-icing facilities; airports at extreme altitudes and/or highly mountainous locations; the dangers of collision avoidance during taxi; microburst radar and weather monitoring; types of airfield layouts; problems with nesting birds; a link to air traffic control topics, &c. — RJH 17:17, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Spice trade (May 9)

Nominated April 18, 2005; needs 15 votes by May 9, 2005

Support:

  1. Burgundavia 09:53, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Tony Jin | (talk) 00:11, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
  3. Eleassar777 06:39, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  4. Junes 09:49, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  5. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 00:22, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  6. Chris Edgemon 05:42, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  7. --Zxcvbnm 23:09, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  8. Septentrionalis 16:16, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  9. --Eigenwijze mustang 22:43, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  10. KTC 17:03, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: Hugely important historical topic, and it's a tiny stub (unless someone's turned it into a trade directory again as it was before I edited it--194.73.130.132 09:00, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This article could also include description of salt routes, that were nominated as a separate article some time ago. --Eleassar777 06:39, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
And trade is little better. I believe I did propose it for CoTW long, long time ago, but it failed...--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:25, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

History of democracy (May 13)

Nominated April 22 2005; needs 15 votes by May 13 2005

Support:

  1. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:41, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  2. —thames 21:31, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  3. Pyromonkeykw 8:39, 24 Apr 2005
  4. Dhartung | Talk 18:36, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  5. Nobs 02:35, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  6. Ganymead 20:24, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  7. --D. Franklin 09:19, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
  8. --Zxcvbnm 23:08, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  9. Bremen 15:07, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  10. JHMM13 14:10, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

Comments:

  • An extremly important subject - history (or development, evolution, etc.) of the democracy - a dominat political system of our current day - which is not covered on Wiki AT ALL, since the democracy article doesn't even have a 'history' section! Note that democratic movement is a double redirect into politics article as well. Basically, if anybody would be looking for an answer 'how did democracy came around' on Wiki he would came with nothing at all! Considering the size of Wiki, our excellent (or, at least, huge) coverage of things like communism, it is an enormous - and amazing - hole, which I believe we must fix ASAP. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:41, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Yeah there's a lot of material here, not just looking back to the ancient Greeks, but looking at democracy's gradual reemergence: baron's limiting the king's power, the magna carta, the treaty of westphalia, the reformation, the enlightenment, "waves" of democracy since the american and french revolutions, and democratic elements in non-western cultures (intra-tribal democratic groups) and colonially-imposed democracies.
  • Some of this is already covered in articles on people like John Locke and round-ups like Political philosophy (which is basically written from a democratic POV), but there should be something separate. Some discussion of Francis Fukuyama and Samuel Huntington would seem advised for the end-section. --Dhartung | Talk 18:35, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • <Jun-Dai 07:01, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)> Whether Democracy is really a dominant political system of our day, or whether there is simply a smattering of a watered-down version of it here and there in the world is a matter of much debate. More importantly, I think this article should be begun as a section of Democracy, and then expanded to a new article as the material develops. It would be better if it were tied into Democracy as a main article, since the "history of Democracy" is greatly dependent on what one defines as Democracy in the first place. </Jun-Dai>
  • This will be the COTW soon, no problem. Bremen 15:07, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • I've just added a link to Athenian democracy as a start. KNewman 21:08, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

Basque nationalism (May 9)

Nominated April 26 2005; needs 10 votes by May 9 2005

Support:

  1. Burgundavia 08:19, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Idiazabal 12:05, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  3. Ganymead 00:57, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  4. Rjhatl 11:27, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  5. Eigenwijze mustang 22:44, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: A major topic with a long history. Burgundavia 08:19, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

Today we conmemorate the destruction of Guernica.Idiazabal 12:05, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)



Nuclear engineering (May 6)

Nominated April 29 2005; needs 5 votes by May 6 2005

Support:

  1. — oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 13:55, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
  2. JHMM13 14:03, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
  3. 500LL 17:01, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
  4. Dalf | Talk 23:46, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Of course you choose this article on my final exam week... the week I'm not editing. Oh the irony. — oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 13:55, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
  • With the large background on supporting literature, it is a shame that this entry is in the shape it is.
  • It's not a bad start, but it reads more like a course catalog than an encyclopedic entry on a professional discipline. I fixed the formatting, which at least makes it look less amateurish. --Dhartung | Talk 08:24, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Singer (May 7)

Nominated April 30 2005; needs 5 votes by May 7 2005

Support:

  1. Ganymead 22:14, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  2. bogdan ʤjuʃkə | Talk 23:04, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. RexNL 22:37, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Burgundavia 01:01, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

Comments: Linked to from over 1200 articles. -- Beland 19:57, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Military (May 14)

Nominated April 30 2005; needs 10 votes by May 14 2005

Support:

  1. BanyanTree 16:28, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Phlebas 22:55, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Burgundavia 01:00, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
  4. RexNL 18:50, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Wonderfool t(c)e)

Comments: Linked to from over 800 articles. -- Beland 19:57, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Civil rights (May 8)

Nominated May 1 2005; needs 5 votes by May 8 2005

Support:

  1. Stancel 12:05, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Soviet Fronts in WWII (May 9)

Nominated May 2 2005; needs 5 votes by May 9 2005

Support:

  1. KNewman 16:59, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Just a list of red links. If this one goes well, we could then expand on German Army Groups in WWII. KNewman 16:59, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
  • Hasn't this been through here already under a slightly different title? See archive. — RJH 22:24, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • I believe it has been nominated before. I think it was called Front (Soviet Army) or something like that. There were no fronts in it, however. KNewman 12:40, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
  • This isn't a potential article; this should be named List of Soviet Fronts in WWII. That said, the bit about fronts & army groups should be further clarified. --Dhartung | Talk 05:48, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Do you think it would be better to nominate each front separately? KNewman 12:40, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Civilian control of the military (May 10)

Nominated May 3 2005; needs 5 votes by May 10 2005

Support:

  1. Beland 02:09, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

People (May 11)

Nominated May 4 2005; needs 5 votes by May 11 2005

Support:

  1. Darwinek 19:29, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Montevideo (May 11)

Nominated May 5 2005; needs 5 votes by May 11 2005

Support:

  1. Stancel 18:26, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Falphin 22:58, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • It is an absolute SHAME that this article is so short. This is the capital of Uruguay and certainly needs to be a longer article. Compare this with [[Bogot%E1]], the capital of Colombia and you'll see what I mean. Overall, South American capitals seem to be ignored by many. -- Stancel 18:26, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Collaboration_of_the_week/Archive&oldid=13362698"