Wikipedia talk:WikiProject General Audience

message: By the way, what basic knowledge should readers be assumed to have?  I've usually thought articles should be written for someone with roughly a high school education; does this seem right?  Is it reasonable to assume an understanding of algebra?  ‣ᓛᖁ[ ᑐ] 13:16, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the audience will vary with the article.  An article about a basic concept, like addition, might have an even younger audience while an article about a very advanced topic, like instanton, might have a more educated audience.  Rather than setting the goal to be any particular education level, I would say we should make each article accessible to the "widest audience possible".  For some advanced topics, there may not be any way to make them accessible to those with only high school educations, but we should still try to make them as accessible as possible, perhaps to people with some college, rather than leave them in PhD-only form. StuRat 15:11, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Assumed basic knowledge of audience

message: Does this include articles that seem to be written for a fan base, like for example Star Trek?  --AllyUnion (talk) 02:26, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say so.  For example, if the article talked about "warp factor" or "phasors" without explaining those terms, I would say we could help there. StuRat 02:43, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope of project 

message: Asteroid deflection strategies is currently nominated on WP:IDRIVE. Support the article with your vote if you would like to see it improved on the article improvement drive!--Fenice 18:25, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement drive

message: A scientific peer review has been started and we're looking for Wikipedians who are members of the scientific academic community to run for the board. If you want to give it a shot come over and post a little about yourself. New nominations are being accepted until the 00:00 on the 17th March.
The project aims to combine existing peer review mechanisms (Wikipedia peer review, featured article candidate discussion, article assessment, &c.) which focus on compliance to manual of style and referencing policy with a more conventional peer review by members of the scientific academic community. It is hoped that this will raise science-based articles to their highest possible standards. Article quality and factual validity is now Wikipedia's most important goal. Having as many errors as Britannica is not good–we must raise our standards above this. --Oldak Quill 18:11, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'm rather disappointed that making the article readable by a general audience is not included in your list of criteria.  If you need anyone to check for that, please let us know. StuRat 18:51, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I quickly wrote the list of criteria - it is certainly not exhaustive. --Oldak Quill 22:43, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see.  Would you be willing to add that criterion to the list ? StuRat 02:45, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia:Scientific peer review 

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.   B2T2 13:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention.  Badbilltucker 18:47, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards 

message: Hello everybody. I think that deep technical & mathematical context shout remain in Wikipedia - If it is the sum of all knowledge, than i should be able to see all of the formulas for the string theory for example. Other sites may go down eventually, but wikipedia will remain - we should just place all technical, medical, chemical, physical, mathematical & so on detail into another page near the discussion. So the wikipedia will be helpful to anyone, disregarding their knowledge on the subject!..
87.237.118.139 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 13:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism

message: Introduction to general relativity is up for FAC and is being heavily debated about the merits of having such an article. I along with several other editors have opposed this article being promoted to FAC (despite trampoline article recommendations) as being an unnecessary content fork. I have moved to have the article merged with general relativity with a proposed merge, to be seen at User:Madcoverboy/Sandbox/General relativity. I welcome your comments. Madcoverboy 18:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction to general relativity

message: Is this WikiProject dead? Well, I think the article about Integrin needs to be accessible to general audience, so we are discussing the issue on the talk page. A.Z. 03:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The introduction is considerably more accessible now. However, the article still needs to be improved. I think this WikiProject needs to become active. A.Z. 18:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem described by StuRat above happened with that article and created difficulties for its improvement. StuRat said on this page two years ago that "I've encountered a problem that while experts in the field are less than 1% of the general population, they spend an inordinate amount of time ensuring that the articles in their field remain too technical for the general public. The 99% of the people in the general public might make an occasional edit or comment, but generally give up once one of these "experts" reverts their edits designed to make it readable by non-experts. Any ideas on how we can handle this situation?" (as seen here) You can see it happening this time here.  A.Z. 18:54, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Integrin]] 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Comment on the WikiProject X proposal 

message: 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)
thread_title:  WikiProject X is live!