Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dartmouth College/Archive 1

Archive 1

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 22:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 753 articles are assigned to this project, of which 128, or 17.0%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place the following template on your project page:

{{User:WolterBot/Cleanup listing subscription|banner=WikiProject Dartmouth College}}

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Dartmouth College

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

RfC Policy

There is a request for comment about whether or not WP:BOOSTER documents a standard consensus and good practice that all editors and school/college/university articles should follow as an official policy or guideline. Madcoverboy (talk) 19:29, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:14, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:03, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:12, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Dartmouth College articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Dartmouth College articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 22:20, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Daniel Webster FAR

I have nominated Daniel Webster 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. Brad (talk) 00:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposal for United States A-Class review process

There is a proposal at WikiProject United States to start an A-Class review process for United States related articles. Please stop by and join the discussion. Kumioko (talk) 02:02, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Discussion on consolidating inactive and semi-active university WikiProjects

This project may be affected by a proposed consolidation of inactive and semi-active WikiProjects covering universities. The proposed consolidation is being discussed on the talk page of WikiProject Universities. We are seeking feedback from the projects that may be impacted before we decide on a course of action. Please drop by to participate in the discussion. Thanks! –Mabeenot (talk) 06:41, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Discussion to remove the Automatically assessed logic from the WikiProject United States template

Greetings, there is a discussion regarding removal of the logic used to populate Automatically assessed article categories from Template:WikiProject United States. Most of the categories (over 220 Wikipedia wide) were deleted in February 2013 because they were empty. These categories were previously populated by a bot that hasn't run since 2011 and the categories aren't used. Removal of this uneeded/unused logic will greatly reduce the size and complexity of the WikiProject United States template. Any comments or questions are encouraged here. Kumioko (talk) 18:21, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Lest there is any confusion for people who don't speak the same language, the words "logic used to populate Automatically assessed article categories" refer to the feature that was supposed to allow this WikiProject's template to "inherit" class and importance ratings from other WikiProjects. Kumioko says that there are no longer any bots performing the function that formerly copied those ratings. --Orlady (talk) 23:21, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject Dartmouth College at Wikimania 2014

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 14:01, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject United States - 50,000 Challenge

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:29, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Laura Ingraham

There is a discussion at the Laura Ingraham talk page found here that members of this project might be interested in taking part in. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 01:01, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Bravig Imbs

Hello. I've just created a stub on Bravig Imbs, a Dartmouth College graduate and a writer. It would be great if anything could flesh it out. Please note that his first novel prompted him to leave the college: [1].Zigzig20s (talk) 13:11, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Thomas H. Cormen

Hello. I've just expanded and improved the article on Thomas H. Cormen, the author of Introduction to Algorithms and current chair of the Dartmouth College Department of Computer Science. Have a look to my edits and eventually add any relevant information. -- Giorgio Gonnella (talk) 14:49, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Dr. Seuss

Hello, I have some interesting quotes to add from Ted Geisel from when he was interviewed for the Fortnightly. Will be adding today or tomorrow.Malke 2010 (talk) 18:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Adding this project to the supported projects list of WikiProject United States

Since this project is marked as inactive I am going to add it to the supported projects list of WikiProject United States. New Hampshire and several other education related projects haev already been added and this will allow the project and the articles within its scope to still be monitored and maintained within the scope of another project. --Kumioko (talk) 20:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I've posted below very poorly-given information regarding Dr. Julian Whitaker. This is a very poor "criticism," in that, if you want to truly talk about "self-promotion and self-interest, and beyond that, "self-gain," of industries, just stop and take a clear, observant, look at the pharmaceutical industry. Wealthier than the oil market, indeed, and more corrupt than every other industry we know. Consider: the CDC / FDA support of the drug for hemopheliacs that came out a year or two ago, killing human beings, then, instead of rightly trashing it all, what did they do? Sold it to Japan and some other countries FOR PROFIT, SELF-GAIN, SELF-PROMOTION. Wow, that criticism of a dr. who's given so much of his life for making others well, and taking a lot of grief from every direction for simply making people healthier [even, yes, curing people of cancers for the which the cancer institutes ONLY take your money and run], wow, Dr. Whitake is a not person to be pointing any bad finger at. The pharmaceutical companies, the AMA, FDA, CDC, these are the fellows who even have a revolving door policy of inter-hiring employees, for the sake of...cornering markets. Then, going forth to defame individuals who've had to run upstream their whole lives, far more than those in the industries, to run upstream MERELY to go forth to heal. REmember, Hippocrates said that the first rule is "To do NO harm." What does chemotherapy do? Radiation? and many other "standardized" methods of uh, not curing, not healing, just remitting - they burn you, they destroy [fact!] FAR more healthy cells than the cancer cells, and many of them have the tragic side effect of whatever organs they damage, they cause PERMANENT damage. Whereas natural cures, CURES, work in co-operation with the manner in which each individual's body works...that is the goal, and often that can be met with by practioners who take the time to KNOW EACH PATIENT, as a whole, integrated human being. Psychiatry, atop all of this, is a pseudo-science. There are not doctors, tests, no matter how specialized they may be, who CAN track what happens to your brain, for just one instance of damaged organ due to pharmaceutical treatments. They have no way to know what that drug, harmful mind drugs, do to your brain, your organs. Sure, they can see some "count" changes, possibly, but that could happen due to other issues, and often, they don't tell you the worst of what a drug is ALSO doing to your system, other counts that are "off." Anyway, psychiatry, check it out, is about the worst sham of the last century. Check it out: Freud, the "father of pscyhiatry," who was merely out to MAKE A NAME FOR HIMSELF [ah, speak of "self-promotional, it doesn't get any worse than Freud ! - and he started it all]. Freud, due to the fact that MOST of his patients came from the aristocrats, very rich families, etc, REFUSED to report that his patients had been victims, often, of incest. He was forced by his "overseers," to rather state in his work that catapulted him into the limelight, to say that his patients merely THOUGHT they were victims of incest. So, he changed his works to accommodate the rich. Sound like ah, how about eons of history of how it is that those who do so much corruption get ahead, while those who are truly loving, respectful of others, caring, truly healing, are made a "ruination" by those who have the means to do so... This paragraph on Whitaker should be immediately removed. It's speculative, and truly, if you wanna' point the "self-promotional" finger an any person or institutions, my God, take a look! I knew an FDA pharmaceutical inspector, had been doing it for awhile, and was the ONLY inspector in that department "who was not taking money under the table from the pharmaceutical companies..." He was not fired, he quit. And of course, he HAD to quit because he was a marked man in being so decent & honest, and not lying in reports put out by the FDA in order to pass a drug through that was so damaging to human beings. Or, read the story by the CHEMICAL ENGINEER at Eli Lilly, the man who developed hormone replacement therapy, who quit the field completely, because of the prolific corruption in standard pharm. companies, everywhere. His statements about Lilly trying to force him/his team, to do worse damage after the first year or 2 the HRT's had been released onto the market, and AFTER the incoming data that HRT's were causing breast cancers in women... The article is in the Well Being journal. Or go view the married high-profile biochemists who'd worked at Aberdeen Inst. in Scotland, who were blacklisted, reputations ruined by Monsanto, because they rightly reported what was happening in GMO'd potatoes when fed to rats. The DVD is called, "The Future of Food." The heinous acts of the U.S. gov't, in bed with industries like Monsanto, it goes way beyond self-promotion, it's adestruction of not only our food sources, but of the mass of humanity [also a revoling door policy at Monsanto, employees between the EPA, FDA, CDC, USDA, and Monsanto...check out that history of employees who moved in & out of each of these gov't agencies and Monsanto / Clayton Thomas sits on the board of Monsanto - hey, NO gov't individual, and NO judicial person, especially a supreme court judge, should be sitting on ANY board].

THIS SHOULD BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY... IT'S NOT EVEN BACK WELL, WITH FACTS...IT'S JUST OPINION...

Criticism

Whitaker has been a controversial figure, and has been criticized for his self-promotional approach to medicine, potential conflicts of interest, and his embrace of scientifically unsound practices.

The National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF) criticises Whitaker for promoting himself as "America's #1 health advocate," "America's #1 health champion," and "the physician America trusts." According to the NCAHF, Whitaker advocates potentially dangerous therapies involving growth hormones, chelation and megavitamins, and intervenes on behalf of other "maverick" doctors in legal trouble.[7][8]

The Los Angeles Times notes that Whitaker serves as a consultant to vitamin companies advertised on his website, a practice criticised by other doctors who prefer to promote only evidence-based products. In the article, Whitaker is classified as a doctor "mixing celebrity and cyberspace".[9]

Whitaker claims to be a leading expert in "anti-aging medicine".[10] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.221.239.214 (talk) 20:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Dartmouth Big Green softball

Hello, everyone. I've recently started the College softball task force, working to help expand Wikipedia's college softball coverage. One of the articles we are looking for is a Dartmouth Big Green softball article. If anyone on this project would be willing to consider adopting it and writing a team article, please consider visiting the softball project. Thanks, Ejgreen77 (talk) 04:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

College basketball navigation templates

Please join the discussion at the College Basketball Wikiproject for forming a consensus on the creation of a basic navigation template for college basketball teams. CrazyPaco (talk) 09:42, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Dartmouth College Featured article review

I have nominated Dartmouth College 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. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:58, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Tuck School of Business FAR

I have nominated Tuck School of Business 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. Bumbubookworm (talk) 13:06, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

FAR for The Green (Dartmouth College)

I have nominated The Green (Dartmouth College) 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. Bumbubookworm (talk) 12:50, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

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.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)