Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alternative education/Archive 1

message: Welcome, everyone. I am really excited about this project. It's my first collaborative effort at Wikipedia, so I'm also a little nervous. But I am also confident that we have what it takes to make this project succeed. I'm sure that some of you will be sidelined by other projects or important life matters, and others will simply lose interest. Let's do our best to be civil and not run anyone off. Attrition is natural, so we should also keep our eyes peeled for others who are interested in contributing to help keep our numbers at least stable, if not growing.
First things first. We all need to take a thorough look at the project page and discuss the best way to complete the fields provided (or better yet, just start filling them in, we can discuss later), so that we all know what our purpose and focus should be. I have taken the liberty to start many of the fields, but as I have expressed before, I have no interest in man-handing this project. It belongs to all of us, and all Wikipedians. I am merely trying to keep things moving. My edits are up for review just as yours are, and my ego is not tender--so hack away. Thanks again for your involvement, Master Scott Hall 00:02, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We could also delete (or hide with HTML comments) any headings that we're not actually using. We don't anticipate any descendant projects for the foreseeable future, so it just clutters up the page to have that header in there. At the moment 90% of what's on that page is just in the way. Wahoofive 01:22, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

message: Is there a rule or accepted standard regarding where to have article discussions? In other words, should we do all of our talk here or on the specific article discussion page. It would be nice to keep it all together here, but that may give the impression to those outside the Project that we are working in quasi-secret. How is this normally handled? Thanks, Master Scott Hall 15:56, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussions about individual articles should take place on that article's page. Committed members of the project should add all pages listed on this project to their watchlists. The only discussions here should be meta-discussions about the project itself or more general philosophical or coordination issues which would apply to all pages in the project. —Wahoofive (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had a feeling it might work like that, but had nothing to base it on but common sense. Thanks, Master Scott Hall 20:19, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article discussion location 

message: How do I adopt an article?  I'd like to adopt the Open Classroom article.  Alan Nicoll 00:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just click on an article on the list, click "edit this page" at the top, start writing. You might find How to edit a page, Your first article, Guide to layout, and Guide to writing better articles helpful. Feel free to ask more specific questions. Happy writing. Good luck, Master Scott Hall 00:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adoption of Articles 

message: Just found this project - looks great!  Happy to contribute.  Would you also consider including outdoor education? Jtneill - Talk 05:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely. I have added Outdoor education to the project. If you notice more omissions, please feel free to add them to the list. I'm sure there are many more. Let us know if you have any questions. Glad you have you aboard. Thanks, Master Scott Hall | Talk 12:51, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdoor Education 

message: Great - I've been meaning to propose a WikiProject on Education for a long time, so this project should really be a sub-project of that one (that project would need many subcategories anyway, as it would be unmanageably big). Education is at the core of Wikimedia projects, but still a weak point in terms of its spread and depth of information. I just might create this now - watch this space.. Cormaggio @ 22:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be great. Somehow, I thought that project already existed when I suggested this one. Probably because Education has a portal. After the fact I noticed that their portal seems a little under the weather. Perhaps after getting this one well underway, that'll take a while, we can expand or shift in that direction. Anyway, that's for later. In the meantime, glad to have you on board. Thanks, Master Scott Hall | Talk 23:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've set that project up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Education, and notified the wikiEN-l mailing list about it (as well as plugging this project too). Looking forward to working on both, but for now, I need some sleep. Thanks for the welcome :-) Cormaggio @ 01:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fantastic 

message: The term Alternative school and the article Alternative school do not refer to the same thing. The article describes Alternative education(but also mixes it with Independent school), while the term refers to schools for students with special needs, i.e., "at-risk" students, potential drop-outs, pregnant teens, returning students. I propose we merge the info on the current Alt. school article with the Alt. ed. and Ind. school articles, so that Alt. school can be used for the correct term. Input? Thanks, Master Scott Hall | Talk 21:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what you mean by "correct", above. I'd agree that Alternative school should describe schools for at-risk students and the like, and Alternative education should be a broader topic including all kinds of alternatives. Independent school should be merged with private school since the terms are nearly synonymous (except in England, where "independent school" and "public school" are synonymous). Or maybe independent school should be a dab page. —Wahoofive (talk) 22:27, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In the current Alternative school article, most of the lead section describes Alternative education, while the Types... section describes types of Independent school which is actually a type of Alternative school itself. It appears that we agree, so I will proceed with the changes. Thanks, Master Scott Hall | Talk 22:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead with the changes we discussed. However, I received a message from User:Rbellin that the changes had been reverted due to lack of discussion. I think this editor has valid concerns about the proposed actions and I have replied, explaining the rationale behind the changes and am awaiting Rbellin's response. In the meantime, is there an widely accepted protocol involving how much time should pass between the time that there concensus for a change and when the change is actually implemented? I am just curious about how to avoid future complications of this nature. Thanks, Master Scott Hall | Talk 19:28, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

text: There's no hard and fast rule. Wikipedia editors are encouraged to act boldly in making changes. There's no way to guarantee lack of conflict. Anyway, if this other editor reverted you so fast, there's hope he'll respond to your comments promptly too. —Wahoofive (talk) 21:47, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Okay, I think we may have worked out a compromise on the changes. When you get a moment, visit the discussion and give us what you think. Thanks, Master Scott Hall | Talk 23:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative school 

message: As mentioned above I've recently set up Wikipedia:WikiProject Education, which is to address the generally poor quality of education-related articles across Wikipedia. I envisage this as being broken into smaller (more manageable) projects, such as this one here. But I also think that more general education articles such as on Pedagogy and Learning should be covered there and not here - otherwise the projects will overlap hugely. In no way do I want to take away from this project - I will be involved in both and I hope others will too - but I just want to keep things a bit tighter. I'm open to suggestions on this, however - and if anyone feels that we need separate projects, please propose them or set them up yourself. I hope that, on the basis of these projects, Wikipedia will start to become truly useful for the full diversity of educators, everywhere. Cormaggio @ 13:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the overlap issue. The only reason that many terms, including the ones you mentioned, ended up in the AltEd project was that they needed help, the Ed project did not exist at the time, and that they are critical to many AltEd subjects. Many of these terms are related to educational philosophies on which AltEd subjects are founded. But, I do agree that they fall under Education first. I have no problem moving these articles over to the ProjectEd, with the understanding that we will run into some small grey areas that are a difficult to categorize. The important thing is that they get done, not where they get done. I have a feeling that many of the same people will be involved either way. I would also like to recommend that both Projects put their heads together to solve the terminology issue discussed in the section above. As we now have participants from at least Australia, the UK, & the US, I think we can get a good consensus for the solution. Thanks, Master Scott Hall | Talk 13:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, absolutely, I set up the Education project to be more general in scope and to try to organise all education articles into some form of system. So, I'll go about changing tags and categories, and would appreciate it if others here did likewise (as well as possibly propose new projects). I'll respond to the internationalist discussion above (by the way, I'm Irish, but that would still put me in the British English camp). Thanks. Cormaggio @ 12:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks to both Cormaggio and Master Scott Hall its great to see the project structure for education articles coming together! Its going to significantly facilitate the overall quality of contributions I think and will help guide me at least for where I can usefully direct energy.  Well done and thanks to both of you - hope I can help out along the way. - Jtneill - Talk 03:06, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project overlap 

message: I have looked at the four templates which represent an attempt to organize/standardize terminology used in discussing education.
Speaking as a Canadian (Albertan), none of the options captures our situation.
May I suggest something like the following:
State-run schools (direct administration by a national or state authority, without reference to a locally elected board of trustees or supervisors)
Local government schools (direct administration by a locally elected board of trustees or supervisors, whether or not there is funding and/or general policy and/or program direction from a state authority).
State mandated private schooling (including:  charter schools; private schools which are regulated and/or funded by State governments although owned and operated by a society or corporation; home schooling, where it is mandated by the State government)
Independently operated schools (private schools, including those owned by faith organizations, where the state chooses not be regulate and/or fund).
In Canada,the basic assumption of our democratic system is that local government (of schools and of municipalities) is fundamentally different from the government of the provinces and/or the nation.  The difference is captured in the term "constituted communities and governments and natural communities and governments".  Canadians would use the term "state-run" to describe education in France, for example, but we would never use the term to describe education in Canada.  We think of local communities as having government, but we do not think of them as being "of the State".  Speaking for myself, I always thought that the American experience similarly distinguished between "remote" government (of the state and the nation), and "local" government (of the municipality, or the school board).
David King 00:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As said elsewhere (see Talk:Alberta charter schools and User talk:David King charter schools are in no way private.  They are a type of public school.  They are defined as public by the provincial and state governments that create them.  Doing the changes suggested above, would reflect a strong bias of the public school districts.  Wikipedia is neither pro- or anti- local school authorities.  I do however agree, that "state school" as used in places like Britain, would imply a very different meaning to many Canadians and Americans.  One thing, that should happen in school articles, is we should always explcitly state (with a link) who exactly operates the school, which in many article's, is not done.  That authority's article, should then give the relevant details.  Wikipedia has a lot of indepth school articles, but it is sorely lacking decent school district (or other authority) articles.  We know about the school, but not about who's running it. --Rob 02:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  State run and community run schools 

message: I'm currently trying to kick-start an overdue wiki project on issues in politics and sociology (and other areas if there are enough controbutors) which relate directly to children and youth. Currently many of the pages such as Youth rights, listed here, are in a dire need of an overhaul.
Would anyone here be interested in collaborating? I was pleased to see that alternative education had it's own project, and would appreciate any help in getting a wider children & youth project going.
Proposal is here: --Cooper-42 15:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject:Children and Youth issues/Studies

message: Hello, 
I have proposed to make a project about Waldorf education because the page is a mess and under constant edit wars.  I have proposed it as a project, but don't wish to duplicate efforts- would you prefer that we make this a sub-project?  Wonderactivist 17:12, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal for Waldorf education project - somewhat overlapping 

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 21:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

message: Hi guys. I see a WikiProject Alternative education tag on the talk page of Accelerated Christian Education. Has anyone had a look there lately?
The article is tagged for clean up and quotes large chunks from the ACE website (possibly a copyvio) and critical studies into ACE. The talk page is a full of people asking questions or putting their point of view about ACE.
I have some practical experience with the topic of the article, but little experience writing about education systems. I see it is on your Cleanup list and I'd be happy to help (I've done a bit already), but could someone from here take a look as well? Blarneytherinosaur talk 04:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Accelerated Christian Education

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 22:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards 

message: Please see Talk:Waldorf education#Request for Comment - we need input on if the article has improved or not. In particular whether it is still unbalanced with respect to NPOV, written in a brochure style or deals with controversies in an inappropriate manner. Thanks in advance. 17:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Comment [[Waldorf Education]] 

message: Hello. I would like to understand better any parameters to adding articles to this project. I have been working on a series of articles that are generally related to alt ed, but I don't want to add info where it doesn't belong. You can see my entire count here; basically sift out almost everything re: youth or students to see what I would add. If nobody responds I will be WP:BOLD; otherwise, just show me the paper so I can color outside of the lines. Thanks. - Freechild 21:47, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Parameters

message: I saw that the Outdoor education page is up for adoption.  I would be interested in contributing to this page as part of a team but the Talk page seems quite inactive.  As someone who has been involved in outdoor ed in the UK - and has studied/trained in certain aspects of it - I could probably write a fair bit about it, but I feel I need someone else to bounce the ideas off of, so as not to introduce a systematic bias. --Vertilly 13:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdoor Education 

message: Taking Children Seriously seems to have a large amount of detail on Karl Popper. The article has more detail on Popper than the actual founder of TCS.  I wasn't sure if that should be the major focus for the article and thought I'd check with this project to see if anyone wanted to check it out for possible improvement.  Dreadstar † 08:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article focus

message: A new proposal for a guideline of naming conventions for schools is now been proposed. I would welcome your comments and input on it at WT:NC(S). Camaron1 | Chris 20:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:NC(S)]]

message: Hi, I've just opened an RfC to review the WP:NPOV of the Waldorf education article.  Please review and provide your comments!  Thanks!  --Rocksanddirt 18:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC on [[Waldorf education]] 

message: Following a discussion at WT:NC(S), a new proposal has been created for naming conventions applying purely to United States school articles, in a attempt to more easily gain consensus for adoption. Some input from the community at WT:NC(USS) would be great. Camaron1 | Chris 17:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (U.S. schools)]] 

message: This project now has a user box located at Template:User WikiProject Alternative education, so do go add it to your page.
--Devin Murphy 02:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: User Box

message: 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 23:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Alternative education 

message: 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 Alternative education 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 00:08, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative education articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release 

message: The article Jacob's Ladder (ropes course) has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
:A search for reference did not find support for this article as written, fails WP:V and WP:N
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist.  The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 16:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|Proposed deletion]] of [[Jacob's Ladder (ropes course)]]

message: 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) 13:15, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leaflet for Wikiproject Alternative Education at Wikimania 2014 

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) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject X is live! 

message: We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month,  will post at /Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of .
 
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
* The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
* The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
* The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).
We're grateful to  for his original , and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of , and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.
Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular pages report 

message: The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.
Portals are being redesigned.
The new design features are being applied to existing portals.
At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template .
The discussion about this can be found here.
Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass.  Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.
=== Background ===
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace.  On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you.     — The Transhumanist    10:53, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject collaboration notice from the [[WP:WPPORT|Portals WikiProject]] 

message: On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace.  On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you.     — The Transhumanist    10:53, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background 

message: 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) 04:23, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for information on WP1.0 web tool 

message: List of homeschooled individuals has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of homeschooled individuals (2nd nomination). Five Years 13:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of homeschooled individuals]] 

message: 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) 22:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

message: Hi WP Alt Ed, I was wondering if anyone would like to offer an opinion on a discussion taking place at Talk:Autonomous_social_center#Requested_move_10_November_2020. Thanks for any comments! Mujinga (talk) 14:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion