To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject and all talk pages of subpages of Wikipedia:WikiProject Council redirect here.

WikiProject Council was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 18 April 2011.

view · edit Frequently asked questions Q1: What's a WikiProject? A1: A WikiProject is a group of people who want to work together. It is not a subject area, a collection of pages, or a list of articles tagged by the group. Q2: How many WikiProjects are there? A2: There are 670 WikiProjects tagged as "Active" (see Category:Active WikiProjects), and 289 WikiProjects tagged as "Semi-active" (see Category:Semi-active WikiProjects); many of these have one or more subsidiary task forces or work groups. Q3: What's the biggest WikiProject? A3: Nobody knows, because not all participants add their names to a membership list, and membership lists are almost always out of date. You can find out which projects' main pages are being watched by the most users at Wikipedia:Database reports/WikiProject watchers. Q4: Which WikiProject has tagged the most articles as being within their scope? A4: WikiProject Biography has tagged 2,120,309 articles, which is more than three times the size of the second largest number of pages tagged by a WikiProject. About ten groups have tagged more than 100,000 articles. You can see a list of projects and the number of articles they have assessed here. Q5: Who gets to decide whether a WikiProject is permitted to tag an article? A5: That is the exclusive right of the participants of the WikiProject. Editors at an article may neither force the group to tag an article nor refuse to permit them to tag an article. See WP:PROJGUIDE#OWN. Q6: I think a couple of WikiProjects should be merged. Is that okay? A6: You must ask the people who belong to those groups, even if the groups appear to be inactive. It's okay for different groups of people to be working on similar articles. WikiProjects are people, not lists of articles. If you identify and explain clear, practical benefits of a merger to all of the affected groups, they are likely to agree to combining into a larger group. However, if they object, then you may not merge the pages. For less-active groups, you may need to wait a month or more to make sure that no one objects. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide/Merging WikiProjects for more information. Q7: I want to start a WikiProject. Am I required to advertise it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals and/or have a specific number of editors support it? A7: No, there are no requirements. However, new WikiProjects, especially new groups that are proposed by new editors, rarely remain active for longer than a few months unless there are at least six or eight active editors involved at the time of creation. Q8: Under what circumstances are WikiProjects deleted from Wikipedia rather than marked as defunct or historical? A8: Typically, projects are only deleted when they are "false starts" (incomplete projects that never got off the ground), serve as a repository for material that infringes on copyright laws, exist solely as an attack page, or have no other redeeming value. It is more common for semi-active projects to be merged into their parent project, sometimes as a task force. Most inactive and defunct projects are simply left intact with the hope that the materials and discussions collected by the project may become useful at a later date. Q9: How do you revive an inactive WikiProject? A9: The Signpost has written extensively on the subject. Keep in mind that some projects have run their course while others have a scope that is too narrow or too broad to attract a sizable community of editors. If you still want to revive the project, a good way to start is by updating the participants list, inviting new participants, reaching out to active projects for help, and fixing any broken templates and automation. Start discussions on the project's talk page about how to improve the project's organization, goals, and collaborations. Reviving a WikiProject often feels like an uphill battle. Just don't get discouraged. Q10: Who can assess articles? A10: Anyone can assess articles, although it is wise to read and follow any assessment guidelines unique to a particular project before deciding what "class" and "importance" should be assigned to an article. For instance, WikiProject Biographies has a unique importance structure with 200 "core" articles. Good Articles, Featured Articles, and Featured Lists are determined through processes independent of the WikiProject, so using those assessments inappropriately may have negative repercussions. Q11: Is there a limit to the number of projects that can add their banner to an article? A11: No. Each project determines its own scope and can include whatever articles they like. For instance, Elizabeth II is under the scope of 18 projects and task forces while Barack Obama is handled by 22 projects and task forces. Q12: Some WikiProjects provide a WikiProject Watchlist and some do not. Why? A12: As with all tools available to WikiProjects, not every project has set up a watchlist and some projects may not desire to have one. There are multiple types of watchlists a project can use, from Tim1357's watchlists to new article notifications to article alerts to hot articles. A project can choose whatever watchlists they want to use or even devise their own unique tools. Q13: What's the difference between a sister WikiProject and a related WikiProject? A13: People tend to use them interchangeably, but the term "related WikiProjects" is broader than "sister WikiProjects." The terms "parent," "sister," and "child" provide a way of categorizing projects. An example of sister projects would be WikiProject Pittsburgh and WikiProject Philadelphia, while related projects would also include their parent projects (WikiProject Cities and WikiProject Pennsylvania in this case), and any child projects or task forces (WikiProject Pittsburgh Steelers and WikiProject University of Pittsburgh come to mind). However, one confusing bit about the term "sister projects" is that it has also been used to compare different wikis or languages of Wikipedia (i.e. Wikisource, Wikinews, Chinese Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, etc.) which is evidenced by the Signpost's defunct sister projects column. Q14: How do I participate in a WikiProject? A14: Participating in a WikiProject is easy. Most projects have a participants list to which you can add your name. Next, you'll want to add the project's talk page to your personal watchlist so that you can keep up to date on the latest discussions and help editors in need. Check out the project's Featured and Good Articles for ideas about how to improve articles under the project's scope. Take a look at the project's goals or browse the project's stubs and start-class articles to find areas where you can help today. Projects may offer a userbox you can add to your user page as a sign of pride that also doubles as a way to add yourself to categories listing all users who are interested in a particular topic. Q15: What can I do to improve Wikipedia's community of WikiProjects? A15: The WikiProject Council is welcome to anyone with ideas for building stronger collaborative links between WikiProjects. Participate in discussions at a variety of projects and try to answer the questions of newcomers. If multiple projects are working on the same article, try to recruit participants from these projects to collaborate. Host meetups for the participants in projects in a particular geographic area. Create contests and backlog drives that anyone can enter. We've interviewed projects that have used social media to recruit participants, partnered with educational institutions, and even manufactured their own games.

	Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27
	See earlier archives at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject/Archive 1, Archive 2, Archive 3, Archive 4
	This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be auto-archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

	This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Council This page relates to the WikiProject Council, a collaborative effort regarding WikiProjects in general. If you would like to participate, please visit the project discussion page.CouncilWikipedia:WikiProject CouncilTemplate:WikiProject CouncilCouncil

WikiProject Council
FAQs Overview + talk Council page
Coordination
Guidelines (WikiProjects - Task forces) Assessment FAQ Technical notes
Directories
WikiProjects Proposals Signpost
v t e

Hey! I'd like to propose a new WikiProject about speedcubing, the sport which involves solving Rubik's Cubes and other similar twisty puzzles as quickly as possible. I have the following reasons for this proposal:

• Wikipedia's coverage of speedcubing is too slim - the topic has enough third party coverage to warrant many new big articles.
• Articles about Rubik's Cubes and speedcubing rely too much on primary sources, mainly from WCA. While the WCA itself is reliable, secondary sources should be added to compliment the primary ones when applicable.
• Many articles on the topic are outdated or plainly erroneous. For example, the article about 7x7x7 cubes is titled 'V-Cube 7'.

The purposes of this proposal could also be achieved with a task force, but my reason for proposing a WikiProject instead is that the topic transcends the boundries of the WikiProjects about toys, games and sports: Rockfighterz M (talk) 12:32, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Rockfighterz M, a WikiProject is a group of Wikipedia editors. Who else is in your group? If the answer is "nobody", then you don't have a WikiProject.

Everything you typed above might be relevant to a discussion of whether there should be a Category:Speedcubing to go along with Category:Rubik's Cube and Category:Speedcubers. But it has nothing to do with whether you have assembled a group of Wikipedia editors. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:45, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is one user who has expressed the same interest as me, and there are likely some more at WikiProject Toys, as a few have cited Rubik's Cubes as one of their interests. I don't know if this is enough. Rockfighterz M (talk) 18:59, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i think you should make this a part of WikiProject Toys. Sm8900 (talk) 19:50, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#If you have a larger group of editors recommends starting with about 10 editors. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:16, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Mary Baker Eddy article leans heavily on hostile early sources and underrepresents modern scholarship, so help is needed to rebalance it toward her practical Christianity, emphasis on Love, and non-retaliatory response to critics and her religious, journalistic and literary contributions. Muttikins (talk) 23:22, 16 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, @Muttikins. I'm not sure how you ended up on this page, but we really can't help you here. I see you've discussed this question on Talk:Mary Baker Eddy, which is a good place to start. If you need additional help, then the newcomer's Wikipedia:Teahouse or one of the Wikipedia:Noticeboards might be the best place to try next. Good luck, WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:31, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Muttikins (talk) 05:15, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Because I couldn't find one existing already, I just boldly created a category to hold any and all internal reports produced by WikiProjects. See Category:WikiProject-related reports. If such a category already existed, please let me know and I will happily merge. Cheers! Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 07:34, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to set up such a category to hold stuff such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Kentucky/MostEdited, Wikipedia:WikiProject Kentucky/Recognized content, etc., it's probably worth checking in on the bot pages to see if the categories can be automatically added. CMD (talk) 08:45, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Of the examples you gave there, the first was created by me using {{Database report}}, so putting it in a category is a one-time manual task, and I don't mind doing it. In the case of some widely dispersed reports based on templates, they already tend to create categories, but they aren't always in the context of reports for WikiProjects. Recognized content goes into Category:Wikipedia lists of recognized content but it's not categorized under WikiProjects. What I'm basically after here is a category that holds categories of reports from various WikiProjects. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 09:03, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense, but it will likely not be very effective unless automated somehow, given how many WikiProjects there are (and how many are dead). CMD (talk) 13:35, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what needs to be automated. Just add report pages (or a category of report pages) to Category:WikiProject-related reports the usual way. There's WP:NOHURRY. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 18:08, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Without automation report pages may just wipe the category when they update, depending on how they are generated. No hurry does not seem a reason to not improve such a category. CMD (talk) 04:48, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The solution for that is usually a manual one. Place the category above or outside where the bot fills in the report. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 05:47, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the bot wipes out the whole page with its report with no place to put a category, you should consult with the report bot maintainer and ask them what to do to place a custom category. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 06:46, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is what I suggested in the second comment as a way to help the category fulfil its purpose. CMD (talk) 07:05, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I don't think that's the usual case, but again, in the examples you gave, I was able to add categories manually without them being overwritten. If you have no way to do that, consult with the report bot maintainer. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 07:18, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I propose the creation of Wikipedia:WikiProject Iranian Cities to improve and organize articles about cities, towns, and villages in Iran. This project will focus on standardizing city articles, adding reliable sources, and creating missing articles for notable locations. Interested editors are welcome to join! Kamran.h20320 (talk) 20:37, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kamran.h20320, how many people are in your group? A Wikipedia:WikiProject is a group of editors. If you have no editors working with you, then you have no WikiProject. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:39, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@WhatamIdoing Thank you for your feedback and for highlighting the importance of having a group of editors for a WikiProject. Currently, I am in the early stages of proposing Wikipedia:WikiProject Iranian Cities and have not yet formalized a group, but I am actively reaching out to editors who have been involved in articles related to Iranian cities (e.g., Tehran, Mashhad, Isfahan) to gauge their interest. I plan to post invitations on the talk pages of Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities and Wikipedia:WikiProject Iran to attract editors with relevant experience. My goal is to form a group of at least 6–10 active editors, as recommended by the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide. I would appreciate any advice on how to effectively recruit editors or examples of successful WikiProject proposals. Thanks again for your guidance! Kamran.h20320 (talk) 10:49, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kamran.h20320 Have you considered reactivating Wikipedia:WikiProject Iran and asking participants in that if they would like to have a special focus or taskforce about Iranian cities? Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 04:37, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Stefen Thank you for your thoughtful suggestion! I hadn’t considered creating a taskforce within Wikipedia:WikiProject Iran, and I appreciate you bringing it up. I will reach out to the participants of WikiProject Iran to see if there is interest in forming a taskforce focused on Iranian cities. My reason for proposing a separate Wikipedia:WikiProject Iranian Cities is to create a dedicated space for standardizing and improving articles specifically about cities, towns, and villages in Iran, as this topic has a broad scope (e.g., population updates, infobox standardization, and creating articles for smaller cities). However, I agree that a taskforce could be a great starting point, especially if WikiProject Iran has active editors who are interested. I’ll post a message on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Iran to discuss this possibility and report back here with the feedback. Do you have any suggestions for how to structure a taskforce or examples of successful city-focused taskforces? Thanks again for your input! Kamran.h20320 (talk) 10:55, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

=== Update: Iranian Cities Taskforce ===

Thank you for the feedback on my proposal for Wikipedia:WikiProject Iranian Cities. Based on suggestions from @WhatamIdoing and @Stefen, I’ve created the Wikipedia:WikiProject Iran#Iranian Cities Taskforce within Wikipedia:WikiProject Iran. The taskforce focuses on improving articles about Iranian cities, standardizing formats, and adding reliable sources. Interested editors are welcome to join by adding their names to the participants list or sharing feedback on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Iran. Kamran.h20320 (talk) 11:24, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kamran.h20320, I'll WP:REDIRECT the original page to your new WP:TASKFORCE. This group does not attempt to control task forces at all (though we are willing to share advice, if someone has questions).

What I'd like to know is why you thought creating pages for a WikiProject was a good idea. Looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#If you have a larger group of editors, I see six numbered rules, of which you obeyed only one:

1. Experienced editor with thousands of edits – you have 34 edits, not 1,000s.
2. Recruit participants before writing a proposal – you didn't.
3. Scope should have "many thousands of articles" – If "city" means a larger place, Iran has maybe 150 proper cities.
4. Work with existing groups – you didn't.
5. Post a proposal – this discussion here.
6. Wait for approval – you didn't.

Did you not find the page until it was too late? Did you think that your idea was too good to follow the usual rules? WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you. I have recently started editing Wikipedia pages and have noticed many shortcomings in certain areas. I intend to help improve Persian pages with guidance from more experienced individuals. If you have any suggestions on how to contribute in this regard, I would be very happy to hear them and receive your assistance. Kamran.h20320 (talk) 16:00, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On #3, cities typically have subarticles, especially the larger ones, and Iran has several sizable cities. For the rest, since this is being done as an effort within an existing WikiProject, I'm not sure there is any harm. It will either take off, or not, and any cleanup would be minimal. In fact, Kamran did not have to ask permission for what is simply a bold move in an existing project marked as inactive. That all said, Kamran.h20320, you should ask existing members of the project if they would like to help, while building your editing skills. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 16:19, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am doing my best. I hope to achieve a good result from it. Kamran.h20320 (talk) 16:43, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, @Kamran.h20320, I know you're doing your best, and I can see that you are very intelligent and very interested in helping Wikipedia. (I'm even nervous that asking you about our broken process will distract you from improving those articles, which is more important.)

I'm thinking that our instructions are unclear. For example, your 15th edit was to create Wikipedia:WikiProject Iranian Cities. I really, really, really do not want people to create any "WikiProject" pages as their 15th edit, or even as their 150th edit. I want this to be edit #1,500 or even edit #15,000. Was there anything I could write in Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals that would have convinced you that creating this page, as edit #15, was a bad idea? I don't even know if you had seen the /Proposals page before you created it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:29, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking we need some kind of balance that is encouraging new editors to want to improve articles first and is lighter on the discouraging part about WikiProjects. Maybe have something like a "wiki knowledge pyramid" and show a new user "You are here" at the bottom and somewhere up past the middle is creating or expanding WikiProjects. We could show new users how to use existing WikiProject infrastructure to identify articles to work on, particularly those that are stubs or have issues to address. Now how new users discover this kind of information is a tricky part, but perhaps we could modify the standard WikiProject front-page banner to have a link "New editors read this first!" and have an optional way to show this for projects that don't use the standard banner. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 06:34, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have created two new reports for the WP:Database reports page: WikiProjects by human changes and WikiProjects with no activity. This is effectively a split of "WikiProjects by changes" to have the primary sort be by non-bot (human) edits and to get the most out of SQL performance enhancements. I've also added a few useful columns to the first report to aid in management of WikiProjects across the board. Please let me know of any problems/concerns and if anyone has ideas for further WikiProject-related reports (I already have a few on my to do list that I'm reviewing). Enjoy! Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 07:13, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Goldsztajn (talk) 07:48, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With help from an editor who was willing and able to explain what happened, I have sorted out what's confusing editors who are trying to leave WP:APPNOTE notifications and end up here: {{WikiProject status}} is sending people to WP:WikiProject, whose talk page redirects here. Where they want to end up is on the talk page of the subject-specific WikiProject.

With that in mind, I have redrafted the template, so that it will mostly look like this:

This is a WikiProject, an open group of Wikipedia editors. New participants are welcome; feel free to talk to us! Guide to WikiProjects Directory of WikiProjects

The "talk to us" will point to the talk page for the individual WikiProject. I've also taken the opportunity to shift the language away from WikiProjects being "places" and towards being "groups".

If you'd like to see a comparison that includes task forces, inactive WikiProjects, etc., then please look at Template:WikiProject status/testcases.

I'd like to get this change made soon-ish, but it's IMO more important to get it right on the first try, so please let me know if there's anything you'd like to change. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:20, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It all looks workable to me. Thank you for working on this. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 08:13, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the request: Template talk:WikiProject status#Update language. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:54, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is  Done, and I've left a barnstar for the editor whose excellent explanation set us on the right path. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:16, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

This edit request to Wikipedia:WikiProject has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add "the" before "two thousand existing articles" Licheris2 (talk) 22:53, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Licheris2: Can you tell us where this text is exactly? Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 23:02, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the info-box about the proposal process under "Creating and maintaining a project". And I meant "projects" rather than "articles". Oops. Licheris2 (talk) 23:09, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Licheris2. I've fixed it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:17, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You beat me to it. Anyway, is that 2024 process still occurring? Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 23:19, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point. You can see the current state at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Proposing a WikiProject. The box at Wikipedia:WikiProject#Creating and maintaining a project could probably be updated. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:25, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated that page. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:34, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The history of Wikipedia:Database reports/New WikiProjects shows a lot of redirects and deleted pages. It also shows these:

1. Wikipedia:WikiProject AMWikicommonsUploadWorkflow – from a museum; might be intended for Commons
2. Wikipedia:WikiProject Migrants of Colour Stories Aotearoa – same museum, but has five members listed
3. Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia spoken by AI voice
4. Wikipedia:WikiProject AfD Engagement – four members listed
5. Wikipedia:WikiProject Raising Representation – they organize editing parties
6. Wikipedia:WikiProject Genocide
7. Wikipedia:WikiProject Pre Islamic Arabia – two members listed
8. Wikipedia:WikiProject Aram (Suryoye) – four members listed

I am doubtful that any of these will survive. What do you think? WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:57, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The one for genocide puzzled me as they didn't even create a way for people to sign up. I imagine this project could attract many participants but they didn't even bother accommodating people coming to them. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 04:33, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, can imagine people being interested, but that would require having an actual group to start with, so that there is someone for the interested people to work with.

The subject overlaps with Wikipedia:WikiProject Human rights; perhaps they'll end up merged. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:23, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a few of these seem to be specific university/museum projects, which may be time-gated. To that extent, they are probably not intended to "survive". I note Wikipedia:WikiProject Raising Representation for example was recently updated to be past tense. It seems valuable to promote transparency and reporting in such a way, perhaps we need a template which can be placed on such projects saying something like "This WikiProject was part of an initiative that ran from XXXX to XXXX. For ongoing similar work, please see WikiProject YYYYYYYY." CMD (talk) 09:46, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe encourage editing events and museum projects to use a different name? WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:28, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there one? Events can now use the Event:Sandbox space, although I haven't tested it. I don't know what I'd call a time-limited project. CMD (talk) 17:35, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In-person events are usually handled as meetups, e.g., Wikipedia:Meetup/ArtAndFeminism. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:18, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First step then should be to add that as an alternative at Wikipedia:WikiProject. Hopefully someone with experience in the Event space can figure out if that needs adding, otherwise I am planning to experiment with it at some point over the next few months. CMD (talk) 02:03, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This Council should have a "to do" list. New members won't know how to help the Council, except the couple of sentences under How can you help? rootsmusic (talk) 04:18, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The main work of the group here is to provide advice and support when people seek us out for questions. Answering those questions requires knowing how humans behave and being very familiar with Wikipedia's internal workings. Inexperienced editors don't have this combination of skills and therefore can't usually do much to help with this project.

I'm happy to have newer editors hang out here, but there isn't a checklist of tasks to be done. The front page lists the tedious project of updating the manual directory listing. Another task – but one I'd suggest only to a clueful newer person (you might qualify, BTW) – is to look for a couple of inactive content/article-focused WikiProjects that could be merged up into an existing larger, active group. Merging up inactive groups is something we'd like to do, but every step in the path is slow. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Policy and Guidelines § WPPG

 – voorts (talk/contributions) 20:48, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested in reactivating WP:WPPG for the purposes of condensing and simplifying PAGs without changing their substantive meaning. I inquired on the Discord where @Femke, @Toadspike, and @Chaotic Enby expressed interest. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:35, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I confirm that I'm absolutely interested! PAGs currently have a lot of bloat which makes them hard for newcomers to read through, and some streamlining is absolutely needed. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:45, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You do not need permission to WP:REVIVE any existing/former group. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:43, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When a WikiProject is marked as defunct, the instructions output by the {{WikiProject status}} template state: "If you feel this group may be worth reviving, please discuss with related groups first. Feel free to change this tag if the parameters were changed in error." Should that be removed? voorts (talk/contributions) 22:50, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think we instead need to ask @Moxy why he linked to "related groups" to this one page. The "related groups" for Wikipedia:WikiProject Policy and Guidelines would be groups like Wikipedia:WikiProject Manual of Style and Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia essays. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:07, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what is being asked? The link to here is something that is on all project pages not just for the old policy one. Not sure the template coding right now allows us to have specific links of this nature. On a side note the reason the project was stop was the community felt and created the village pump proposals because many though that the project was a wikiproject cabal of only half a dozen editors with most controversial changes going to the new noticeboards anyways.....and that we now have so many policies that a more authoritative location than just a Wikiproject was need it. At the same time there was also a shift to discussing specific changes to policies on those policy talk pages. I have no recollection of where this RFC type conversation took place. Must remember a Wikiproject has forever been singled out as this place not to dictate policies. That being said with the widespread use of RFC in the past decade... that direction for implementing changes may work with the newer generation of editors..... as in having a project to host these and simply posting notices at the pump and relevant policy talk pages. Best we inform people trying to revive obsolete projects... why they're obsolete and what the normal procedure is now.Moxy🍁 23:45, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The intent is not to dictate policy or to host RfCs. The point is to re-draft PAGs with the goal of simplifying them (e.g., making them easier to understand) and condensing them (e.g., removing redundancies or consolidating sections/pages). Then, we would put the re-drafted PAGs to the community for comment and eventually an RfC. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:52, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I completely understand the purpose.... I'm just explaining why things were shut down....like Wikipedia:WikiProject Manual of Style(All discussions, development, maintenance of, and other related matters concerning the Manual of Style (MoS) are conducted exclusively on the respective talk pages of individual MoS guidelines. If you believe the community has matured about Wikiprojects or a new generation have a different point of view of where these things should happen I have no objections. I'd be willing to help out either way...just be aware there's going to be some pushback. If I remember correctly it was the medical, dates and history Wikiprojects content editors that had the most concerns in the past. Must realize the project never really ever got going in the first place was closed down was later revived and it was closed down again due to the above concerns..... all that said feel free to give it a try.... there's not too many left from the era when all this happened.Moxy🍁 00:02, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WPMOS is inactive because it met its goal (figuring out which pages are/aren't MOS, and giving them name that indicate their status, e.g., redirecting the unvetted "Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dermatology-related articles)" page to Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Dermatology task force) – not because people were worried about any sort of WP:CABAL. The description on the page was inaccurate, and I've removed it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:44, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You did what where? I am talking about two different projects with two very different histories. Policy one never got off the ground. The MOS reach its natural maturity.... but nevertheless had the same outcome. Using the MOS example above to explain where talks generally take place now not that there was a cabal at the MOS project. (I guess I'll try to write more clearly). Moxy🍁 00:56, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moxy, you changed what was originally an unlinked sentence, If you feel this project may be worth reviving, please discuss with related projects first, in Template:WikiProject status so that "please discuss with related projects first" now links to "Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council" (this page). WikiProject Council is almost always not a "related project" and almost always the wrong place for these discussions. For example, if you wanted to revive Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicinal botany, you should be talking to Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine, Wikipedia:WikiProject Pharmacology, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants; you shouldn't be posting here. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:20, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to change it.... perhaps it should link to the directory? But I'm not sure directing people to other inactive projects is helpful in the long run. Was thinking that at the time that the council can give better guidance then other inactive projects (as we have here)... If you fill otherwise again feel free to change it. Moxy🍁 00:36, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe point to WP:REVIVE, and make sure REVIVE has a good description about how to build partnerships with related groups? WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:45, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a great solution.... Let's make another number point pointing to where editors can find these other projects. ... Oops my bad I skipped right over point number one.Moxy🍁 00:48, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]