Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vancouver/COTM

COTM to start April 2006

Due to the age of the WikiProject, I think the first official COTM should be chosen on March 27th. Doesn't make too much sense to choose one on February 27th since the WikiProject was created only 24 hours ago, on the 24th. Let's leave the default COTM at Vancouver until then. :) --Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK!. 07:57, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another month wasted on an article that doesn't really require any extra collaboration. --Dogbreathcanada 06:03, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations

All of the nominated articles are quite lengthy and full. Seems pointless to nominate them. Articles that require more -- more facts, more depth -- should be the articles that we nominate. The point of collaboration, in my mind, is to work on bringing more articles up to Wiki standards, not work on articles that are already up to Wiki standards. --Dogbreathcanada 09:26, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree. The Wikipedia collaborations of the week ask that all nominations be stub articles (two short paragraphs or less). Usgnus 05:17, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've gotten rid of UBC as COTM for the month -- let's see if we can agree on a new one. I think the Vancouver General Hospital article has potential. Buchanan-H e rmit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 21:22, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A suggestion to revise the rules: any nomination that has X number or more votes stays on the nomination list indefinitely, where X can be 3 or 5 or whatever. Usgnus 00:57, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that votes older than 4 months be removed. Those votes will have to be recast by the people who originally cast them. This ensures that people voting are active with Wikipedia. --Dogbreathcanada 05:00, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. Nominations with recent votes in favour get to stay on the list. Usgnus 06:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Old nominations should be shelved (4 months of inactivity sound like a good time period). Buchanan-H e rmit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 01:17, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

COTM for April

I hope nobody minds if I add Vancouver General Hospital as the COTM. April's a-comin', so might as well get something up; that article has the most votes so far. Buchanan-H e rmit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 01:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to merge VGH and UBC Hospital into a VHHSC article and put in redirects. Usgnus 02:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. --Dogbreathcanada 05:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The more I look at the VGH page, the more I think we made a mistake. The main article should be called Vancouver Hospital and Health Sciences Centre, and the Vancouver General Hospital should be redirected to the VHHSC page. VGH should be a subsection under Facilities on the VHHSC page. --Dogbreathcanada 05:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like what you've done with keeping VGH around (at least for now). Usgnus 05:42, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's more talk under the VGH article on what I'm now trying to accomplish. --Dogbreathcanada 05:52, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also try to get one of my "patented" cell phone photos (hehe, that sounds weird) of UBC Hospital on my way to school either Wednesday or Friday. Buchanan-H e rmit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 05:55, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen those photos. For a cellphone camera it has really good clarity. What model and brand is it? --Dogbreathcanada 06:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Sony Ericsson K508i. I don't think it's available in Canada yet (it was purchased abroad). Buchanan-H e rmit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 07:31, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, my phone can take pics up to 1280x960 pixels. I thought the maximum was 640x480, but I guess it's even better... Buchanan-H e rmit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 01:35, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

COTM, May 2006

Just a little reminder that the May COTM will be chosen a week from today. Time to get some votes in if you haven't done so already. :) Buchanan-H e rmit™..SCREAM!!!.... 23:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archive page for previous Collaborations

Shouldn't this be done so the previous Collaborations could be easily looked up? feydey 20:50, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Vancouver/COTM#Archives --Usgnus 21:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

COTM for July results

Before and after. --Usgnus 17:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found this to be an easier means to compare the "before" and "after" pictures. Agent 86 18:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- But mine shows what the page looked like before. --Usgnus 18:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Biography

Let us know if you happen to pick an article on a person and we'll alert our members! plange 05:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New template!

Hello, in an attempt to help collaborate across COTW projects, I'm making a template that displays the current picks of each. I've made a template for you to be able to add the name of the current article {{VancouverCOTM article}}, which you can also use to transclude in your other templates so you don't have to update those manually. You'd only need to update this new one to populate the others on rollover. The new template that will display your current pick is {{COTWCurrentPicks}}. plange 03:06, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This template is huge. Is it really necessary to include this on the current collaborations anyway? Maybe a smaller template that links to the main colaborations page is all that's needed. I've never had too much trouble navigating between current collaborations. Agent 86 03:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I was asked to make this template for the bottom of this article and any other COTW project that wants to place it in their footer. That being said, I welcome anyone's attempt to make this smaller while still including the project name and current pick. I know it's very time consuming for me to keep clicking through each COTW project to see what is their current pick as there's no central place that lists current collaboration articles. plange 03:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've posted my response to this on the talk page for the template. Agent 86 17:45, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page Views

Does anyone know if there is a way to find out how many hits wiki-van articles are getting? I understand the reasoning for trying to bring stubs up to standard, but it would be nice to know what Vancouver related stuff people are searching for and reading, and would make sense to make sure those are up to snuff. That's why I voted for Vancouver to be COTM, because I'm guessing it'd be one of the most looked at ones (as well as the main article for this project) - I don't think featured article is too ambitious a goal for this one, and a lot of good work has already been put into it. Bobanny 00:09, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

State of this collaboration?

Is this collaboration going the way of Wikipedia:Canada collaboration? There have been few nominators other than a small core group of editors, and the last nominated article received no attention. Agent 86 02:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated this collaboration so there is a March one. Hope it gets attention. If not, we should post it on the community portal or some other wikipedia message board. Canadianshoper 02:01, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]