| This page was nominated for deletion on 12 October 2021. The result of the discussion was keep. |
If you are new to this page, please see the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/FAQs.
Core topics discussions – Wiki sort discussions – FAs first discussions – Work via WikiProjects discussions – Pushing to 1.0 discussions
Archives
- Archive 1 · Objections archive
- Archive 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 (Sep - Dec 2005)
- Archive 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 (Jan - May 2006)
- Archive 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 ( - Oct 2006)
- Archive 14 ( - Mar 2007) 15 ( - Dec 2007) 16 ( - Jan 2009) 17 ( - Feb 2010)
- Archive 18 ( - Oct 2011) 19 ( - Dec 2015) 20 (Jan 2016 - )
Antarctica
I have nominated Antarctica 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chidgk1 (talk • contribs) 5:17, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
R from Unicode character should have R printworthy
People will see symbols out in the world and want to look them up. Come to think of it, the same logic probably applies to R from emoji flag, R from symbol, and R from colloquial name (unencyclopedic ones should be RfD'd anyway). Dingolover6969 (talk) 12:53, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- I was thinking this same thing. I was going to try and see if I could ask anyone on the 1.0 Team if I could alter the printworthy settings of that Rcat, but since the project is on hiatus, that probably won't me possible. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 18:46, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure we can just add {{r printworthy}} to {{r from Unicode}}. Well, we'd have to request an edit from a template editor, but, the principle of the thing is the same. I also think this talk page is how you notify the 1.0 team, and also that me posting without reply probably constituted consensus and you agreeing constitutes even more consensus. So, it seems quite doable to me. (I just haven't gotten around to it yet.) Dingolover6969 (talk) 17:06, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
- @Dingolover6969 I believe the printworthy parameter already exists on that rcat template, I'm just wondering if I can change the printworthiness section of the rcat's documentation to include that. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 19:50, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
- I mean, there's no section titled printworthiness, it's in the usage section. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 19:51, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
- @Dingolover6969 I believe the printworthy parameter already exists on that rcat template, I'm just wondering if I can change the printworthiness section of the rcat's documentation to include that. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 19:50, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure we can just add {{r printworthy}} to {{r from Unicode}}. Well, we'd have to request an edit from a template editor, but, the principle of the thing is the same. I also think this talk page is how you notify the 1.0 team, and also that me posting without reply probably constituted consensus and you agreeing constitutes even more consensus. So, it seems quite doable to me. (I just haven't gotten around to it yet.) Dingolover6969 (talk) 17:06, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
printworthy notice/suggestion: {{R from emoji}} (flag=yes), {{R from symbol}}, and {{R from colloquial name}}
As I said above, people will see names and symbols out in the world and want to look them up. This logic probably applies to {{R from emoji}} (when flag=yes), {{R from symbol}}, and {{R from colloquial name}} (unencyclopedic colloquial names should be RfD'd anyway) — so they should all be printworthy. If there's some other guiding rationale that would trump this, I don't know it. Dingolover6969 (talk) 17:40, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
"Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 13 § Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team until a consensus is reached. Casablanca 🪨(T) 00:11, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
Question about your team
Hello everyone. I just came across this on Wikipedia.
So is the goal of the group basically to produce alternative physical media versions of Wikipedia articles for the purposes of preservation and/or education to marginal communities internationally? (: Historyguy1138 (talk) 16:13, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

