Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Collaboration/Archive 1

message: Hey, I'd like to suggest that you lower the number of votes needed for an artical to be used in the next by to 3 like the GCOTW has.  You only have to do this until the BCOTW gets popular.  Its a suggestion, you don't have to take it if you don't want to. --ZeWrestler 02:01, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Amount of votes needed.

message: Falphin, I changed the wording on the template from one week to two weeks because I rather thought this was what "Collaboration of the Week" implied (there are other projects called "Collaboration of the Fortnight").  This is what I meant when I, probably too curtly,  wrote "no one supported" the two weeks system; there did not seem to be any indication of it on the page, and I figured it might have been some capricious, spontaneous change. 
Now I see the page had in fact said "Every other week", which is sort of brief but it's there (or at least was).  Considering this, if you want to operate this as a biweekly collaboration I certainly would not oppose it, but I really wonder what others thought the intended period was.--Pharos 4 July 2005 04:33 (UTC)
:Well, I thought that people were to work on articles for 2 weeks .... :) Not too many people worked on the first article Sheikh Hasina Wajed in the first week ... I thought people were saving edits for the second week. --Ragib 4 July 2005 04:54 (UTC)
::Well, I've never used the term Fortnight sorry. But it really doesn't matter to me. And I personally though the Sheikh article did really well if you compare it to the Jap,USSouth, or other collabs during that period. It didn't see to be the most active of weeks. Falphin 4 July 2005 23:15 (UTC)
-->It's officially biweekly then? I will adjust it to the new duration.--Fenice 08:34, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weekly or fortnightly? 

message: I won't be here to update the article as I will be on a cruise at the time(and the next weeks in Prudhoe Bay I won't be able to update it. If there are still 3 votes tie and not much work is done I wouldn't object to expanding the BioCOTW another week. I will leave it up to those here at the time.Falphin 00:34, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 3 votes

message: Would anyone object to keeping him for one more week???? A whole lot more could be done, and no other topics are getting many votes. Falphin 20:46, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: John Steinbeck

message: I left a note for Falphin, but I guess he's busy.  Accordingly, I think we should move forward & keep the project going.  Based on the rules we've established, it looks like Pope Damascus, the earliest nominee with 3 votes.
 Kaisershatner 17:15, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Hiatus

message: I have archievd Louis Pasteur and  Elton John, but looking other nominees all of them must be archieved. Is this project dead, looks like there is not much attention. Will we archieve old unsuccesful nominees or not?--Ugur Basak 13:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This project looks dead. feydey 08:21, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Louis Pasteur]] and  [[Elton John]] archieved 

message: President of the United Nations General Assembly has a significant number of red-links for past-Presidents of the UN General Assembly which could be done --Midnighttonight 01:15, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  If this collab is returns