Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lakes/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Lakes. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Requesting some inputs
Greetings,
Requesting your visit to article Black Sea and inputs on splitting and restructuring @ Talk:Black Sea#Some article restructuring and overhaul
- Also please do have a look at Talk:Black Sea#Coastal cities, requesting help; and help expand Black Sea#Coastal and port cities on Black Sea coast and trade.
- And also requesting to visit Draft:Avret Esir Pazarları, an article is about Ottoman times female slavery with a special focus on the state of non-elite common women slavery in those times; presently looking for more specific inputs and expansion regarding female slave trade across Black Sea coastal cities and help expand the same if you find yourself interested in that topic too.
Thanks and warm regards
Bookku (talk) 15:23, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
FAR notice
I have nominated Great Lakes Storm of 1913 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. Hog Farm Talk 05:30, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Assessment / Quality Review for 'Brown Lake (Stradbroke Island)
Hi Wikipedians,
I have made several improvements to the stub Wikipedia page 'Brown Lake (Stradbroke Island). I would like to request this page to be reviewed in a quality assessment
Stub; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_Lake_(Stradbroke_Island)
SnoMurWal (talk) 01:09, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- SnoMurWal - Reviewed and assessment posted to article talk page. --ARoseWolf 13:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Dartmoor reservoirs#Requested move 9 August 2022
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Dartmoor reservoirs#Requested move 9 August 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 20:04, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Lake Zurich#Requested move 19 December 2021
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Lake Zurich#Requested move 19 December 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 17:23, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Grouping of "Island Lakes" - is this proper?
Hello,
I noticed a new page Island_Lakes was recently created with information on three lakes in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness area in Washington State. This new page contains information about Island Lake, Blazer Lake, and Rainbow Lake, and says the three together are "a set of closely related freshwater lakes".
What I am unclear on is how it was decided that these specific lakes are part of a "group" and that group should be called "Island Lakes". I don't see evidence that these lakes are considered a group in any official maps, nor are they colloquially referred to in this fashion.
I understand that individually, each of these lakes may not be notable. However, it seems like inventing a new name called "Island Lakes" to group these three lakes into one page is not the right solution, if such a grouping only exists in Wikipedia.
Please excuse me if this issue has been already discussed somewhere else - I only learned of the WikiProject Lakes today.
Bendgilbert (talk) 07:24, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
- Bendgilbert, I apologize for such a late response. If I had to guess I would say that the editor that created the article did so based on the USGS GNIS designation for these lakes in which it does group them together as such[1]. The GNIS cites Hitchman, Robert. Place Names of Washington. State Historical Society, 1985. ISBN 0-917048-57-1 as its source which seems to indicate it is grouped together this way in a published document. --ARoseWolf 13:50, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- For additional clarity I am tagging the creator so they can possibly add further details or confirm my assessment: Fimbriata.
Requesting inputs
Greetings
Requesting (brainstorming) inputs regarding Manual of Style proposal @ Chronological listing of coastal townships
Thanks and warm regards
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 06:16, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Project on Loch Ness
Over the next week, there is going to be a work project on Loch Ness by the Wikipedia Discord server as part of an attempt to get Loch Ness to B-class and we would appreciate your help. They are trying to get all vital articles to B-class. (Oinkers42) (talk) 00:14, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Featured Article Save Award nomination at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Great Lakes Storm of 1913/archive2. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:04, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Fishing Video Games
Hello. A number of notable US lakes feature in some prominent fishing video games such as Bassmaster Fishing 2022. Neutral, non-biased edits to such pages (example Chickamauga Lake) have been removed due to being 'promotional content' but their inclusion in such a widely used area of pop-culture is notable and I believe worth of at least one sentence. Could someone please consider adding this information in whichever way is deemed 'non-promotional'? In the example above a number of non-biased citations are available. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C6:CB83:1901:8C5B:4084:7050:B88F (talk) 08:26, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Reservoirs
Does this project look after reservoirs as well as natural lakes? I've noticed that quite of lots of articles on reservoirs use {{Infobox Dam}} instead of {{Infobox body of water}}. Which is correct? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:05, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
RFC on whether citing maps and graphs is original research
Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RFC on using maps and charts in Wikipedia articles. Rschen7754 15:36, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- The RFC, now at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Using maps as sources, has questions related to notability. --Rschen7754 06:12, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Proposed refactoring of geographic feature notability
We are discussing a proposal to refactor the guidelines for geographic feature notability. Please feel free to join in the discussion of this proposal. — hike395 (talk) 03:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Norris Lake (Tennessee)#Requested move 13 June 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Norris Lake (Tennessee)#Requested move 13 June 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 01:50, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:13, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hello project members! Note that per WP:PIQA, all the class ratings are being harmonised across different WikiProjects so we are looking to remove any non-standard classes like SIA-class from your project banner. Would you like to automatically reclassify these as List-class or Disambig-class perhaps? Alternatively it could just be removed and then the articles in Category:SIA-Class Lakes articles would inherit the quality rating from other projects (or just become "unassessed" if there were no other projects) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:43, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- SIA will now classify as List-class, and the banner has been converted to use the standard scale. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- @MSGJ I find the lack of notification frustrating as I had no indication of any of these discussions prior to getting a notification that the category would be deleted. Posting to a talk page is insufficient notice as users do not get an email or notification message via the bell when posting to a talk page unless they 1. check the page often (which is not my case, I rely on a push notification not idle checks for pages that don't change often) 2. users have to subscribe per thread. This is quite disruptive to have a notification after all the work has been completed and not in any means that actually ensure notice and trust there was engagement of members of the project. Posted notice without any engagement doesn't necessarily mean agreement, it could mean a breakdown in communication. ~~~ Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 12:46, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry but posting to the project talk page is the only reasonable way we have to communicate with the project. The message above was posted in April 2023 and if members do not respond then we can only assume there are no active members, or they do not have any opinion on the matter — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:00, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- @MSGJ I find the lack of notification frustrating as I had no indication of any of these discussions prior to getting a notification that the category would be deleted. Posting to a talk page is insufficient notice as users do not get an email or notification message via the bell when posting to a talk page unless they 1. check the page often (which is not my case, I rely on a push notification not idle checks for pages that don't change often) 2. users have to subscribe per thread. This is quite disruptive to have a notification after all the work has been completed and not in any means that actually ensure notice and trust there was engagement of members of the project. Posted notice without any engagement doesn't necessarily mean agreement, it could mean a breakdown in communication. ~~~ Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 12:46, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- SIA will now classify as List-class, and the banner has been converted to use the standard scale. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Lake Ellesmere / Te Waihora#Requested move 25 November 2023
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Lake Ellesmere / Te Waihora#Requested move 25 November 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Polyamorph (talk) 10:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)