Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U2/Archive 1

Thanks

A big thank you to Smith Cool for setting up the project.

thanks for the thanks smithcool 19:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Assessment

I added 'assessment' to the project banner but haven't added any criteria to it yet. That's OK, I can develop something on the weekend end. THere's probably not that many articles to include. Merbabu 21:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

thanks i was trying to find a person to set that up, i thought we can then nominate people to run it and swap every month or so. i also would like people to help with the newsletter, i have a quick draft written up and i was going to release it on july 1st but if anybody has contributions to it i can hold it back a few days/weeks. if anybody would like to take full charge of the newsletter, just say so in the outreach department where it is based. i would also like peole to help set up a Collaboration of the Month Department and a Portal but there is no rush until everything else is done. smithcool 19:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Scope

Some though should given to scope. Obviously, the MLK (song) article is within the scope of the project, as is Bono, but what about Dublin? I think Dublin is not really within the project scope, but maybe I have got this wrong. What do others think?Merbabu 21:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Thats definitely a toughie, but I would have to say, at this time, no. Yes Dublin is important because that is where the band gre up, but we could make the same arguments for the British cities where Adam and Edge were born. Before we come to a consensus on this though, we should probably check out some of the other Wikiprojects for bands - I'm sure that we'll be able to know what to do from their examples. MelicansMatkin 11:43, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

i dont think dublin is that important, u2 aren't that big over here as they were and i only wrote the scope really quick the day i made this so change it as you please smithcool 19:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to agree. I think that, for the moment, we should just concentrate on articles that are directly related to U2.

--Joelster 02:40, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Tribute Albums

There are a couple of U2 tribute album pages on Wikipedia - Pride: The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra Plays U2, and With or Without You (Kane Album) come to mind. Should these tribute albums be a part of the WikiProject? If they are, I'd suggest that they be marked as Low importance. MelicansMatkin 16:18, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

i dont think they should be part of it because they are not recorded by the band u2, this project is for u2. but many may argue that it is still their music even if they did play on that album. smithcool 18:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Formatting

Someone messed up the page - I fixed it. Make sure to add "|}" at the end of each section. Kamryn Matika 17:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Over 80 users recently invited

I just added invites to the talk pages of over 80 U2 fans. We should hopefully see a drastic increase in membership pretty soon. –Dream out loud (talk) 22:25, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

thank you and congradulations, but how did u have the time????? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Smithcool (talk • contribs) 19:08, June 23, 2007 (UTC).

It took about 10 minutes with AWB. –Dream out loud (talk) 01:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, i hope they only provide reliably referenced material and have a better standard of contribution than the average wikipedia pop culture contributor. With a topic like U2, it's much harder to get quality than quantity. Let's wait and see. Merbabu 02:18, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Help offered

Hello everyone, I'm Neranei. I am a huge U2 fan, and am working on amassing U2 albums, etc. If you need anything, especially boring menial labor to be done, you can comment on my talk page. Hope I can help this project, I noticed there wasn't one, and was actually intending to start one in a bit, congrats for getting it done! Cheers, Neranei 23:43, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Heading text hard to read

Although I can work through it and see, there may be others who have difficulty reading the black text on the dark green background in the section heading on the project page. I would suggest yellow or gold. SteinAlive | ☎ | ☉ 10:12, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

if you think so, change it all for exactly 1 day and then see all the replys we get if we get any. but first write it at the top of the page about the change and to comment here if it is better or worse

new layout

i have made a new layout (i used the portal template and edited a lot for what we need). it covers the comment on top of this saying black may be unreadable so text is in white. i am changing it now so the page may look strange for the next few mins. i hope you all like it. Smithcool 19:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC).

it is very late so i will finish the layout tomorrow. if anybody has any comments, disagreements on it just contact me. i still have a template of the old layout so if more people like the old layout i will change it back because this is a team project and everybodies view counts. Smithcool.

I was thinking about a complete change in colour. I'm not sure about the green. Could we have black background with white text? And maybe red headings or instead a red heading strip? Ie, like the HTDAAB colour scheme? And like U2.com? Merbabu 22:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I like the green since it relates to the green in the Irish flag. I think the white text looks better than the black, but I don't like the white lines above the the darker header portion. I remember a web page I made a long time ago and a gold or yellow text looked awesome on a dk green bkgrd. I know if I start tweaking right now, I'll get sucked into the wiki black hole, so I will see what I can do later...( I still haven't slept since last night, so I s'pose I'm a wikiholic....Oh yeah, and my name is SteinAlive.. will see what transpires from now till my next login. SteinAlive | ☎ | ☉ 23:17, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

i originally thought to use the HTDAAB colour scheme when i set this project up but i didnt because that album is not current. they are recording a new one. but we could try it and see and change it to the colours of the new album when it is out. Smithcool 12:56, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

new colour scheme

i have changed the colour scheme to the HTDAAB colour scheme. let me know what you think and if i will change it back or not. i like it apart from the blue links. if we can change the colours of the links please tell me how. Smithcool 13:07, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Can I offer my opinion? I like the idea, but it is a bit painful on the eyes. Personally, I liked the colors before. Neranei 13:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

i have changed it again to a better colour scheme but staying to the HTDAAB colours. if anybody knows how to change the links from blue to another colour please tell me because they are very unclear. Smithcool 17:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't see why a color scheme should be used. Everyone is going to have a different opinions as to what is good and what is bad, so I say avoid colors altogether. I looked at the WikiProject pages for a lot of other bands, and they don't implement any colors at all. According to WP:STYLE, markup should be kept simple because it will appear different on many browsers and screen resolutions, and using various colors may make the page difficult to read for colorblind users. –Dream out loud (talk) 17:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I think it's great, but Dream out Loud's probably right about color-blind users. I had an idea the other day, we should have a Wikiproject U2 Barnstar. I made a graphic, which can be found here. Does anyone know how to create a barnstar? Thanks so much, Neranei ^T/C 17:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

what do people think of the page colours now???i think it still has the htdaab scheme but is mainly white. also a u2 wikiproject barnstar would be a great idea for people who contribute to the project or u2 page alot. great idea but the link doesnt work for the graphic Smithcool 22:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Um... I'm not sure how to link to the image, if anyone knows how to that's the file name. Thanks! Neranei ^T/C 17:35, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I think we should just keep the colour scheme simple. If you have a look at other projects, most of them have the simple blue Wikipedia background. --Joelster 02:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Happy to Help

Hi my name's Joel and I'm a huge U2 fan. I've just signed up to be a part of this project, and even though I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, I hope I can be of some assistance.

--Joelster 21:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

thanks alot for offering help. we need people for the newsletter if you would like that, it is really only typing since i have a template already, nothing too hard for somebody new. let me know if you are interested. Smithcool 22:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

yep sure. Like I said, I'd be happy to help

--Joelster 22:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

sorry!!!

sorry for my lack of effort this month on the project. i have been on holiday and im only back and i am very busy for the next few weeks. i hope you all understand. i also started a portal last month but there has been no progress on that so far. i dont think there will be a newsletter this month but if anybody can put anything together for it i would be very happy. i already have a template so only typing is needed. thanks. Smithcool 22:39, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

U2 Project Newsletter

In regard to the message you sent me, I'd be more than happy to contribute to the newsletter, but I don't think it'd be possible to do one before the end of the month. So like you suggested, we can just start on August if you like. Let me know what you think anyway.

--Joelster 22:21, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Month

Hello, I noticed in the newsletter that you needed help with the Collaboration of the Month. I'd be willing to help in any way you'd like; let me know! Thanks, Neranei ^T/C 03:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

me and another member where talking about it and decided to have it every 2 weeks not every month. but we have nothing done so if you want to do it you will have to set it all up. thanks for your interest. Smithcool 13:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, ok, well, I am not quite sure how to do it, but I will ask around. I am a bit preoccupied with a Mediation Cabal case, but will get to the Collaboration soon. I would definitely like to help the project; I should become a bit more involved. Thanks again for your work! Cheers, Neranei ^T/C 15:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Update: I've spoken to some people, and am awaiting their reply, so I should be able to get this up and running within a week or two. Please don't hesitate to contact me if there is anything specific that you would like me to do. Thanks! Cheers, Neranei ^T/C 17:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject U2 July 2007 Newsletter - Amnesty Link

Also posted to User talk:Smithcool

While I personally may agree with the aims on Amnesty International, I am unsure whether wikipedia is the place to solicit sales which benefit any particular cause. To me, it sounds like bias. It is my opinion that the phrase, "so please buy a copy" should be removed. The altruistic virtues will be apparent to readers interested in the cause. That is my 2cents. SteinAlive | ☎ | ☉ 06:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I will change it if at least 10 members disagree. it is not fair to change it if only one person disagrees. thank you for your views on the newsletter. (also what is 'my 2cents'? im irish so can you explain) Smithcool 13:59, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

"My two cents" is a common saying, at least where I come from. In a nutshell, it means to make your opinion known to others (putting in your "two cents"). SteinAlive, while I don't specifically agree with you, but I think that you do have a point. I would agree with removing the words "so please buy a copy" from future editions, but I think that the rest should stay, including the Amnesty International site link. Remember, it's not like we're plugging a random charity, it is something U2 supports - charity work is a big part of what U2 is. And by the way, I don't think it is "bias" to support something that you beleive is for the good of the world. And that is my "2 cents". --Joelster 22:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thx, Joelster for the phrase description. (I forget sometimes that colloquial expressions are not always familiar to the worldwide audience that receives Wikipedia.) My reasoning for suggesting the removal is that an encyclopedia is not necessarily a place for the advancement of any religion, sect, political organization, institution, or organization, aside from providing information. I foresee the possibility of someone who believes in, say, global terrorism making an attempt to solicit sales of a product with profits being donated to their cause. Such a person may believe that the cause is for the good of the world.

While the individual may believe fully in the cause, others may not. That is not to say that I am interested in advancing any particular cause: my position is neutral with regard to wikipedia. I may or may not support advancing any cause, be it gun control or gun freedom, or whatever...

It is just my opinion that having a phrase within wikipedia which asks the reader to support a cause blurs the lines of what wikipedia itself supports. Does wikipedia officially support Amnesty International? What about Al-Qaeda? Or genetically modified food? Or nuclear power? Or farmed salmon? Or wild slamon? What about creation/evolution? Where do we draw the line?

The fact that U2 supports Amnesty is why it is included in wikipedia. But, in my opinion, wikipedia shouldn't tell people what or whom to support. SteinAlive | ☎ | ☉ 07:11, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

we will leave the newsletter how it is and we will not say that again. thanks for your views. Smithcool 14:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

august newsletter

The august newsletter is under construction at the moment and will be released by the end of the month. is anybody here really good at editing and can tell the editors of the newsletter how to do more than one colour in the header of the newsletter. if anybody does please contact me. Smithcool 14:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

archives

i was thinking about archiving this talk page. if anybody thinks i should please let me know. Smithcool 14:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Help

Since this project was started on 19th june it has gone a long way. But the project has 36 members and only a handful are in deparments. we still need people to run the outreach department and the portal also a peer review department may be set up if more people volenteered for them. joelster and i are writting the newsletters but we need people in the outreach department to released it and make sure there are no mistakes. if 2 people did the outreach department it would save me so much effort but would be little effort for the people in the department. also the portal was mentioned in the first newsletter and every newsletter since. we need people to set it up and run it. i already have a template on it, it just has to be filled in and maintained. i hope after reading this you will all consider helping in departments. the more people who imput into the project the better it is. after all my giving out i would like to thank everybody who asked me to join a department or just went for it themselves. Smithcool 19:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC).

Project barnstar

I tried to let Smithcool know, but I did get your messages about the Barnstar. I know it needs to have some elements of black and red in it. So what is the general idea of what you wish for me to do? User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Non-free mages missing rationales

I created the sub-page Non-free images missing rationales and added it to the "goals" list. I only got to go through about half of the images, but we need to collectively add rationales to each one, or they will eventually be deleted. –Dream out loud (talk) 23:22, August 10, 2007 (UTC)

Adding song information to single-only releases

I listed to "Slow Dancing" recently for the first time in a while. I recalled how it was first played on the Lovetown Tour, but wasn't actually recorded until the time of the Zooropa album. That got me to thinking. There are a lot of U2 songs that have their own history, but not enough to warrant their own article. Particularily songs like Slow Dancing or Holy Joe, which have only been released as a B-side to a single. So I want to propose that we add information on songs which have only been released as B-sides before to their respective singles. This can help to expand many of the singles articles that haven't been extensively worked on yet from being stubs (or extensive details on their position in every sales chart in the world) to proper articles, as well as giving information on songs that otherwise would be excluded from Wikipedia. Thoughts? MelicansMatkin 02:05, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Hm. That's a good idea. Of course, I would be willing to help, but others may see it a bit too fancrufty. What do you think? Neranei (talk) 01:50, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I obviously want to do it (other wise I wouldn't have suggested it!), but I do want to know what other Wikiproject members think before I start on Slow Dancing. I just see it as a way to include information on songs that would otherwise be ignored. I'm not proposing a seperate article, just a little more information on the B-Sides. If anyone would like, I'll create a list of all the songs that were B-side only releases. I can think of Slow Dancing, Holy Joe, Lady With the Spinning Head, and Are You Gonna Wait Forever off of the top of my head, and I'm positive that there are more that copuld be included, especially from the '80s. MelicansMatkin 02:05, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I am definitely a proponent of the idea, but I am just a bit worried that others may see it as too fancrufty. That's the only concert I see. Neranei (talk) 02:10, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Since no objections have been made, I'll go ahead and start work on Slow Dancing. MelicansMatkin 19:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

If you want help, I'd be happy to help. Neranei (talk) 22:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, a page on U2 b-sides is a great idea. I can contribute as you go with some references. Just a warning - I know I am a pain - but I will be hard on unreferenced content. On the other hand, if someone writes something and I know I have a reference for it, I will put it in.--Merbabu 01:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I will be pleased to help; Merbabu, I'm really bad with inline citations, sorry. And, perhaps it'll be good enough for DYK? Neranei (talk) 01:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that the release of Slow Dancing occuring four years after it was first played could fit in. And yeah, I know that references will definitely be needed for most of the B-sides since they are barely known. It's why I made sure to put so many in for the Slow Dancing section on Stay (Faraway, So Close!). MelicansMatkin 01:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

List of... Covers

Many of the U2 song articles have sections where covers are listed, but some of these sections are growing ridiculously long. Some such as Sunday Bloody Sunday and One seem to have another cover added to the list every few days or so, and I remember reading in this article that there are close to 50 covers of I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For. I've tried to trim these sections down by keeping it limited to covers that have been recorded and released on an album/single, but the sections are still growing. I'm just throwing this out there, but should we consider creating Lists for cover versions of U2 songs, such as List of Sunday Bloody Sunday covers or List of I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For to clean up these sections/articles. Heck, even List of covers of U2 songs could be a possibility (albeit a bit wordy). What do you think? MelicansMatkin (talk) 00:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Edit: I've gone ahead and created a subpage to act as a test edit for my suggestion; feel free to edit it as you see fit if we decide to go ahead and create this list. It could be made into an actual article after it's reached our (reasonable) satisfaction. MelicansMatkin (talk) 01:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

You've brought up a very good question. Nothing irks me more than seeing an entry for a non-notable band who played a U2 song on their recent concert or non-notable CD. We really need to start trimming done and establishing REAL notability.

As for the questions of separate lists – that could fly well, but could also get criticisms. This is a common way to handle lists of “In Popular Culture” in otherwise serious articles. Separate list articles have been made for all the video games and cartoon mentions of otherwise serious articles such as Krakatoa and Orang utan. Others on the other hand hate their inevitable listy and stand alone nature and suggest re-merging. gah!!!

It’s difficult to manange – I’m happy with any measure that reduces all the non-notables. With or Without You has been particularly bad in the past. kind regards --Merbabu (talk) 02:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I've been working on this for a long time. It's still not near completion, but if anyone would like to take a look over it, do some minor cleanup, etc, the page is User:MelicansMatkin/List of covers of U2 songs. I'm hoping that it will soon be completed, with every mentioned cover referenced.

Speaking of sources, some sites (U2wanderer.org for example) I'm having to use excessively for references. If anyone can help me to track down other, potentially more reliable sources than this, it would be very much appreciated. MelicansMatkin (talk) 20:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, it took far longer than it should have (due to my laziness), but the List of covers of U2 songs (A-M) has finally been created, with cover versions of each applicable song linking towards that article. I'll try and post List of covers of U2 songs (N-Z) tomorrow, though that is incomplete. Any help that can be given in completing it once it has been posted would be much appreciated. MelicansMatkin (talk) 05:40, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Very nice work. ANd quite a tedious task. I hate seeing any and every cover added to ever increasing lists within articles, and this seems a good way around that problem, although I suspect there might be some opposition to it - wait and see. Any reason for splitting them into two articles? Are there other examples of lists split purely along alphabetical lines? --Merbabu (talk) 05:54, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure there will be some opposition too; I don't think there is any other list on Wikipedia like this one. The only other lists that I know of that are split into alphabetical/numerical lines are the Pokemon species lists (example), though I'm sure there are more. I worked on the lists as a subpage, but a while ago it struck me that this list is very likely too long to be a single page (especially since it's still incomplete). I thought that splitting it into segments would help with this and tried to divide it according to the halfway point in the alphabet. I can combine the two if that is preferable. MelicansMatkin (talk) 07:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

PopMart Tour project

I would like to turn PopMart Tour into a featured article someday and have it featured on the main page. Right now, it is a B-class article, so needs some work, but I am determined to write this article and make it as nice as it can possibly be. I would like to know if anyone is interested in heavily contributing to the article with me, hoping one day to get the article to featured status. –Dream out loud (talk) 02:51, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I may not be able to do much, but I will help where I can. At the moment I'm focusing on the "List of..." mentioned above, but when I've got that made into an article I will be only too happy to help out in any way I can. MelicansMatkin (talk) 02:55, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Hi, just wanted to draw your attention to a merge I have just proposed, to be discussed here, concerning merging How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb (Assembly Edition) into How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb. As U2 seems to be a topic with a number of dedicated editors, I will leave you to decide what is best to be done about this yourselves. J Milburn (talk) 19:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

This is a complete hoax, along with Blindness (U2 Album). I have tagged the ladder for speedy deletion, and the other article with an AFD. –Dream out loud (talk) 19:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Leads...

I just did a copy edit of the Gloria (song) article and it go me thinking about leads. According to WP:LEAD, the lead is essentially a summary of the main article that can stand alone on itself as a kind of mini article. It should capture the essence or most vital points of an article. Being a summary, there should be nothing in the lead that is not in the main article. And, its size should of course be commensurate with the size of the article - no point rehashing the whole article again, on the other hand a long article should not have a 2 sentence lead, but 2 or even 3 paragraphs.

It's not something the project is going to be able to fix overnight, but is something to think about as you edit articles. I will make an effort to copy edit a few more articles and see what I can do on leads. happy editing all. --Merbabu (talk) 06:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

UBX

If there aren't any objections; I'll make a WikiProject userbox. THE KC (talk) 03:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC).

I don't have an objection, but I thought there was already a userbox, {{User WikiProject U2}}. Or do you mean an alternate userbox? MelicansMatkin (talk) 04:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

SBS

Alright, my bad about the ubx, but I have nominated for featured article status Sunday Bloody Sunday. Can I get some support for this here? [1] THE KC (talk) 14:01, 27 February 2008 (UTC).

Eh, I'm kind of hesitant to support or oppose the nomination. Make no mistake, it's a very well-written article, but there is some information in there that should be sourced (notably in the Live section and the Covers). Heck, the covers should probably be even removed (Once I've finished the "List of Covers of U2 songs" test page mentioned above and made it into an actual article, it won't be needed). I'd also like to see information integrated into the article on the single's B-Sides, similar to what has been done for Where the Streets Have No Name and Stay (Faraway, So Close!) I'd also recommend a copyedit.

Make no mistake, I think the article is good, but it still needs work before it's ready for FA, IMO. I definitely don't want to see it go through the same number of nominations that it took the U2 article to be promoted. MelicansMatkin (talk) 15:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Project logo

Just a note that your project logo, could be seen a little politicised. Does the use of the tricolor add anything of value to the project? Half of the band actually hail from England, not Ireland and would've thought the project would want to dispell the whole overtly Irish image. It's no skin off my nose, and don't want to get into a fight about it (by any means!) but just thought I'd raise that point. -- Jza84 · (talk) 00:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thats a vaild point I guess. Does anyone else have an opinion? Joelster (talk) 02:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Even though have the band was born in England, U2 still considers themselves to be Irish. They all grew up in Ireland, and Bono even said at Live Aid, "We're an Irish band... we come from Dublin City, Ireland." I don't think it's an issue. –Dream out loud (talk) 02:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Bono also refers to himself as an "Irish rockstar." If you saw American Idol Gives Back, you know what I mean. I have no prob with it. THE KC (talk) 01:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC).

Agreed - I think the use of a flag is a problem. U2 are bigger than Ireland anyway, and have often said they don't like flags or boundaries. Let's move beyond the parochialism. Howabout a white flag? lol --Merbabu (talk) 05:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

A white flag might 'tear down the walls that hold [us] inside', so to speak ;) Joelster (talk) 06:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

U2 3D almost ready for a GA nom

I've been working on U2 3D since I first heard about the film, and pretty soon, I think the article can earn its well-deserved good article status. It's not quite ready yet, as there are still a few things that have yet to be included. The editing section needs to be expanded some, the reception section needs some critical reviews, and the setlist needs some sort of synopsis. Of course, if I can get some help with all this, we can get it done much faster and I'd definitely appreciate it. I created a to-do list on the article's talk page, so check that out, and let me know if you'd like to help out or have any questions. –Dream out loud (talk) 16:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

U2 discography

I've been working on this page for a while now and i'm wondering who directed all these music videoes. --U2 is alternative rock (talk) 11:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

U2 3D has been nominated for GA-status

I recently nominated U2 3D to be promote to good article status. As of now, a GA review has yet to begin, however one can be started by clicking the link on Talk:U2 3D. Please help this article to get to GA status, so it can one day become a featured article, along with U2. –Dream out loud (talk) 02:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

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) 21:28, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Expermiental music genre

Had a question about adding Experimental music to the U2 article's infobox Genre section. Feedback would be welcome! Thanks. Dreadstar † 22:32, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for U2

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 22:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

"Live"

I'm quite concerned with the sheer amount of detail put into song articles regarding live performances. In some cases it takes up the entire "History" section of the article, and in others it makes up the vast majority of the content period. If nobody has any objections, I'd like to start pruning this all away to leave only the barest bones of information regarding live performances (with the exception of some notable tracks such as Sunday Bloody Sunday). Thoughts? MelicansMatkin (talk) 20:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

do you have an example of something that needs fixing? --Merbabu (talk) 22:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Two Hearts Beat as One is one example; the information on live performances is much greater than the information present in the rest of History section (most of which talks about the music video). Gloria is another; roughly half of the article is live performances, and the rest of the article is comprised of two sentences about the latin chorus, and an equally small section for the music video. I really don't see a need to describe in detail every time the song was moved to a different position in the setlist. Mysterious Ways is equally bad; outside of the tracklistings and chart the bulk of the text is talking about live performances on the ZooTV Tour. The Ocean is a fourth example. It all seems excessively trivial to me, especially when the bulk of these articles is talking about live performances instead of the actual history in the creation and development of the tracks in the first place.

On a side note, I do know that there is some information for the history of the song in books such as U2 by U2 and Into the Heart: The Story Behind Every U2 Song, but I don't have them with me to add the information to the articles. But regardless, when the bulk of an article is talking about how the song is performed live I think there is something wrong with that. MelicansMatkin (talk) 22:42, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

agreed. There is certainly some tedium in there. Some info is fine such as when a song was last played. Also if a song continues to be played. I have those two books and have always meant to go through them. Good idea. --Merbabu (talk) 01:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

For reference, this is the kind of change I was thinking of, using the Gloria article as an example:

"Gloria" made its concert debut on 16 August 1981; the October album had not yet been finished and Bono announced it was "Gloria and Gloria". It was used as the opening song for almost all October Tour dates in 1981-82, but during the War Tour's "Pre Tour", it was moved to the end of the main set as "Out of Control" became the band's concert opener. At the start of the first proper leg of the War Tour, "Gloria" reverted to its position as opener, while on the second leg, it soon gave way again to "Out of Control" and became the final song of the main set, as filmed in Live at Red Rocks: Under a Blood Red Sky. On the Unforgettable Fire Tour's first leg, "Gloria" and "Out of Control" rotated as concert openers. This was the last time "Gloria" was used as a concert opener - on subsequent legs of both the Unforgettable Fire Tour and the subsequent Joshua Tree Tour, it was used in the encore. As the Joshua Tree Tour progressed, the song appeared in the main set, and this move became permanent on the Lovetown Tour. Its last Lovetown performance was on 9 January 1990, and this was the last time U2 played the song - or any from the October album - until it returned to the setlist on 30 March 2005 at the second show of the Vertigo Tour. It was played occasionally on the Vertigo Tour's first leg, typically segueing into "The Ocean" from Boy. It then made one appearance on the second leg before a several more occasional appearances on the third leg until the final weeks, when it was played at six concerts in a row. It did not appear at any of the 21 Vertigo Tour concerts in 2006; its final performance was on 14 December 2005. "Gloria" has been played by U2 over 350 times.

becoming:

"Gloria" has been played by U2 over 350 times. It debuted on the October Tour prior to the release of the album, and was introduced as "Gloria and Gloria" by Bono. It made appearances on every tour up to the Lovetown Town, after which it was not played for fifteen years until the Vertigo Tour, where it made several sporadic appearances. It's last appearance as on 14 December 2005.

It's essentially all the same information, but cut down a hell of a lot so that it doesn't make up the bulk of the article. MelicansMatkin (talk) 04:34, 10 February 2009 (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 06:51, 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} 09:47, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

No Line on the Horizon FAC

As many/most of you probably know, No Line on the Horizon has been a featured article candidate for some time now. I'm not sure when it will be concluded, but I will be moving into a new apartment come 3 September and will not have any internet access for a short time after that. If any concerns are raised during that time period, would one of you be able to address them for me? Cheers, MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 00:16, 29 August 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) 04:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment on Biographies of living people

Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, many wikiproject topics will be effected.

The two opposing positions which have the most support is:

1. supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
2. opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect

Comments are welcome. Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment.

Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced BLP articles if they are not sourced, so your project may want to source these articles as soon as possible. See the next, message, which may help.

Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

List of cleanup articles for your project

If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see: Cleanup listings A list of examples is here

Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages"

If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles that your project covers, to a special "incubation page", contact me, User talk:Ikip

Watchlisting all unreferenced articles

If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip

Ikip 05:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)