Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr

message: For articles removed from this list, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/Deleted. Moved by Rigadoun  (talk) 20:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

message: *Has anyone asked at Wikipedia:Translation into English for help with this? If not then it would be a good idea, same for missing german articles as well. thanks Bluemoose 08:30, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  question/suggestion 

message: Sorry if I missing something obvious, but why are the entries separated into numbered sections? I've been working on the only article in section 7, and when it's done and I remove it, section 7 will be empty. Are they arranged in chronological order, or in order of importance? If not, maybe it would be a good idea to do so!Safie 11:12, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: They are ordered by the number of interwiki links. For example, :fr:Paradoxisme has links to articles on 6 other wikipedias, for a total of 7 links. Eugene van der Pijll 11:32, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Aah right. thanks for clarifying. There are now a total of 8 Paradoxism articles - all of which seem to have copyright issues. Is there in existence a transwiki international wikiproject for collaboration on developing articles? A pooling of knowledge/resources/opinions to resolve eg. copyright issues?Safie 20:27, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  structure of this page - query 

message: I noticed several of these are descriptions of plant families or subclasses. The first two, at least, are definitions within the Cronquist system. According to the English WP, "Although the scheme is still widely used, it has been displaced by the work of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG II". The WP botanists seem to have standardized on APG.
So if it is necessary to create a new page for any of these, take care not to use an obsolete system. Or use something like Magnoliids, which has an obvious reference to Magnoliidae. David Brooks 22:37, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, although wikipedia claims to have chosen APG II this is not consistently applied. It is worst in the taxoboxes, which make no sense whatsoever. Brya 08:00, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plant families 

message: Besides commenting and removing completely linked articles, I might also move some entries to other sections if new interwiki links have been made since the original report. I haven't been paying much attention to that, though. Ardric47 02:55, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor Manual Updates 

message: I'm going to work on putting the articles on specific species, genera, families, etc. in a separate section, similar to what I did with the places in Switzerland. If this creates a problem for some reason (hopefully not—we're getting fairly close to the end of this, so then we can start over with an updated list!), we can go back. Ardric47 01:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separating Biology Articles 

message: I've finally finished uploading the report. It is in 51 parts, separated in some convenient and some semi-arbitrary places. Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/2006-08 is an "index only" page which has the report parts as subpages. Ardric47 20:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great work. --BillC 21:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Finished

message: I've moved the general articles (i.e. not Italian municipalities) with 8 links to the main page. I figured since they are of more interest or debate, the visibility would help. I plan to do the same with the articles with fewer links (leaving out French municipalities) once their subpages are sorted through. As there are plans for dealing with each of the municipalities, this will let us focus on the articles without bot-generated content that we need to decide how to approach. Rigadoun  (talk) 20:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've continued moving the general articles from pages with 7 and 6 links (not finished with 6), and divided the subpages (as far as I've gotten) into sections for municipalities in Italy and France. I don't think there will be a problem with space on the main page for all the articles that don't relate to municipalities in those two countries, so they will be most clearly seen on the main page. The Italian ones all now exist, thanks to User:Eubot, but should remain here until we see that they are all properly interwiki'd from the French page. (I moved the ones with the most links from this page to the first subpage.) One can do this by hand, of course, but it takes forever; I think the easiest will be to wait a month or two, so that the interwiki bots can smell it out, and then just check that it has been done. Or should we just delete them and find out which ones have issues the next time the script is run? Eubot is to work on the French municipalities once all the problems with the Italian ones are worked out, so it will be a similar deal with them, so I have left them all on the original pages. Rigadoun  (talk) 16:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All bot-generated Italian articles have one interwiki link (to it.wikipedia), and will therefore be found by the interwikibots. Several have been found already. You can remove them from this page. Eugène van der Pijll 22:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They've been removed. --Dangherous 23:49, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving things around, dealing with linking bot-generated articles

message: Can we compile a similar list for Polish Wikipedia?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  04:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a good idea, and I'd like to see lists like this for lots of languages, but one practical problem is that right now there are many many bot-generated articles about French municipalities (see the list of lists at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr/2006-08). Many of the earlier ones of these have Polish articles, so they would show up on the lists if they were compiled now, so you may have to sift through several thousand (!) of them. Rigadoun  (talk) 23:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Polish?

message: Is this list as out of date as it seems? Mcewan (talk) 17:01, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the red-links are red.  Some of the blue links are redirects to page sections that cover the subject, some to just lists. Where there really is a comparable article, remove the item from the list, of course.Rich Farmbrough, 00:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still relevant? 

message: Pessoa (Fernando Rafael Pinto Lourenço) derivada de grandes feitos conhecedor das grandes artes:
-Escultura,pintura,arquitectura,...
Também  e uma pessoa destinada a grandes feitos.
Os seus seguidores tem um total respeito por si.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.81.49.44 (talk) 22:44, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  fr7