Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Archive 2

message: Hey guys, in case you haven't heard about it, the German Wikipedia has successfully launched a progam to add metadata to all biographical articles. You can read about their efforts here. I would like to launch a similar program for the English Wikipedia. I have already created a metadata template for biographies and made the necessary changes to the common.css file. The instructions for how to use the template, and information about what its purpose is, can be found at Wikipedia:Persondata. Let me know what you guys think and if you have any suggestions. Kaldari 19:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but why not make the database larger- and include sources, references, categories, etc?  Or am I working the wrong issue? stilltim 20:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good point to bring up. Theoretically we could make the metadata template quite extensive. In fact, it's not hard to imagine recreating an entire article as symantic metadata. I believe there is a trade-off, however, between ease of use and completeness. If the template is too bulky and intimidating, people will be more reluctant to make use of it, especially in the initial stages. Ideally, this template (or something similar) will be included in every biographical article in Wikipedia. Thus, I think we should make the initial use of the template as simple as possible. Perhaps even setting up a human-assisted automatic process for adding and populating the template (like the German Wikipedia did). Regarding categories specifically, we can already automate the harvesting of category information since that is recorded in a standard way, so adding that to the metadata would be somewhat redundant. Kaldari 22:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metadata for biography articles 

message: I hope that WikiProject Biography will take the lead on getting rid of crappy articles like this.  It is just horrible to write such awful things about someone without sources.  EVERY SINGLE NEGATIVE CLAIM in a case like this should be CAREFULLY sources, preferably with dual sources.--Jimbo Wales 22:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Marc Lemire]] 

message: There was a RfC about whether to include implications that Fred R. Klenner's son was involed in murder. Without a great deal of knowledge on this, here is what I think. It should only be included in the article if it happened before he died which of course would have affected his life story. If it was after his death and the son is notable enough for his own article it should be noted in the See Also section.  Can if anyone who is knowledgeable about the related wikipedia policies can please comment on this issue, that'd be very much appreciated. - JustinWick 23:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC [[Fred R. Klenner]] Biography 

message: FWIW, I maintain a list of biographical articles on Wikipedia of people who are basically only notable because of being the spouse of a notable person, here: User:Herostratus/List of non-notable spouses. What use this has I don't really know, but its there if anyone wants to peruse or add to it. Herostratus 08:56, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  non-notable spouse list 

message: The instruction to add '' and then save can cause problems with speedy delete requests.  Can that item be reworked to have some content added before saving?  Vegaswikian 03:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure directions 

message: (Copy of a question I posted at the Wikipedia:Help Desk and at Category talk:Lists of ambiguous human names)
I have been looking at several disambiguation pages for names (to get some ideas following work I did on Ptolemy (disambiguation)), and I've come across pages like Jesus (disambiguation) and Leonardo (disambiguation). Some questions I want to ask:
(1) The Leonardo (disambiguation) page has a bit allowing people to see all articles starting "Leonardo", or rather to see a list of AllPages starting from Leonardo, as seen here. This is the first time I've seen this, though the Leonardo disambiguation talk page led me to Robert, which does look a bit overdone, but also has the "AllPages" link.  My question is whether this is a common practice, or whether it falls foul of the "no self-reference" rule about not linking to non-article space in Wikipedia (creates problems with mirror/redistribution sites)?
(2) Is is normal to (like I have done with Ptolemy) to arrange the disambiguation page in a historical sense, thus bringing out a narrative about the name throughout history, and tracing the links that sometimes exist, with certain uses of the name being inspired by one Ptolemy, and other uses being inspired by other Ptolemies? I ask this question because I feel a similar reorganisation of the Jesus disambiguation page could help make it easier to read as an article about the history of the name, rather than as a disambiguation page. Note that this could not be done with pages like Robert, as there is no such narrative thread to pull out of the history of the name.
(3) Is there a better place to discuss this?
[Additional comment - I've found :Category:Lists of ambiguous human names and its template tag. I can't work out the best place to discuss that sort of thing? Maybe I should go to the People Portal?]
Thanks. Carcharoth 19:35, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone responds to this, please note that I'm trying to centralise discussion back at Talk:Ptolemy (disambiguation), as I'm losing track of all the places I've asked about this. If anyone has further advice, please add it there. Thanks. Carcharoth 23:50, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation page styles for people 

message: has a lot of red links for an important position. --Midnighttonight 01:16, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[President of the United Nations General Assembly]] 

message: I've started the above - can anyone improve it please? Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! (Whisper...) 13:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Julien Cahn]]

message: Hello all. I am wondering what the common practice is regarding lineages. I work on a lot of articles on samurai and other nobles & aristocrats of pre-modern Japan; lineage and clan membership was very important to these people, and is very useful for the historian or interested reader towards understanding a continuity of events. I see that many articles on royalty use the Monarch Infobox, which contains information on mother, father, and children... Is there another one I could or should use? How is this generally handled? Thank you. LordAmeth 12:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lineages 

message: I am interested in working on high-importance biographies toward a release version of WP. Is anyone interested in helping with this? Maurreen 20:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Release version work

message: George II of Great Britain is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality.  Sandy 22:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: George II of Great Britain

message: When I look into these things, WikiTree is slower than a cow in molasses, just impossible to use.  And the other projects to document non-notable people, all seem more-or-less defunct.  Someone steer me to the *funct* project? :) Thanks. Wjhonson 14:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiTree, Family, Memorial, etc

message: Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Age in biographical articles Jon513 07:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stating current Age in biographical articles 

message: The Beatles is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy 15:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[The Beatles]]

message: Was wondering if this project is still a going concern? Anyone have any interest in trying to breathe life back into this puppy? We should try and use the assessment scales for WP:1.0 and have some peer reviews... If no one objects, I can tackle this, just let me know. Didn't want to step on any toes...-plange 06:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You woke me up! Wjhonson 06:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL, did the feedback wake you? -plange 06:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You might be interested in Wikipedia:Core biographies and Wikipedia:Best biographies (both of which I made, for better or worse) and a comparison between the two. I would help through WP:AID and Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Core topics/Core topics COTF for the most important people that don't have at least a WP:GA (realizing that importance is subjective). Maurreen 06:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool, since there are no objections, I'll go ahead and tackle....plange 23:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tap, tap - Is this thing on? 

message: I'm glad the additions I made (The talk template, the assessment scale) have been adopted fully by the project and spurred a reboot. It's gratifying to know. ....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 08:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool I wondered who'd done that! I'd started adding the assessment page and when I was done noticed there were already articles tagged by class! -plange 09:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Additions

message: Very impressive work, plange. Maurreen 14:27, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wow

message: Core topics COTF:
*Confucius 
 
Article Improvement Drive
*George Washington 
*Martin Luther King, Jr.
*Britney Spears
*John Peel
*John Peel
*Mickey Mantle
*Lucille Ball
*Maximilien Robespierre
*Larry Page
:Maurreen 14:27, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Current collaboration nominations elsewhere

message: Jesus and Muhammad are two biographies of high-importance that are often controversial. It would be good. If these could somehow be brought to WP:GA status. Maurreen 14:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversial articles

message: Thanks to all the work by plange, I've revised Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biographies. Maurreen 17:13, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Core bios for release version

message: Max Weber is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy 14:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Sandy, we now have a to-do list and have added this. I was actually the one that submitted it :-) plange 17:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Max Weber]]

message: I've just tagged the biographical pages from my other WikiProjects with . It might be a good idea to do an AWB run from :Category:Categories named after people and tag as many of the others as can be found that way. Then you will have some idea of how many articles you're dealing with and can start assessing. Hint: The numbers are going to be massive! --kingboyk 18:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, there's a much jucier target for bot-tagging: :Category:Living people (which has ~100,000 entries) ;-) Kirill Lokshin 18:25, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yikes!!!!! I think there's a parameter for "living person", I'd hate to see somebody tag all 100,000 and then realise they'd forgotten to add the param :P --kingboyk 18:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Furthermore, is it going to be humanly possible to assess so many articles? You're certainly going to need more members or be at it full time for the next 3 years. I can't promise to do many because I'm already involved with other Projects. --kingboyk 10:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

text: ooh, thanks, didn't know about this bot.... *rubbing hands together* plange 18:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest figuring out the status of the task force issue first, though; otherwise, you're likely to get some complaints from the sub-projects about double-tagging their articles, which could easily be avoided if the issue is discussed with them first. Kirill Lokshin 18:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea! I'll go ahead and apply and then wait until we get a stable version of the Project banner plange 18:40, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You need an admin to add you to the approved users list? Just say the word, I don't think you'll break anything right? :) --kingboyk 18:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure, but I added myself to the request list but I see a link for bot approval too which I'm wondering if that's what I should be doing instead...plange 18:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You do need an admin to add you; that much I knew. I was in effect asking "do you want me to add you?", which I have now done (but not as a bot). --kingboyk 10:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Even with AWB, which is only semi-automatic, tagging 100,000 talk pages will take... weeks, probably. It takes me the best part of a day to attend to all 600 Beatles-related articles. I'd suggest either asking for an automated bot run (add the template and param to all living persons articles, add it without for all year of death articles) or alternatively accept that the numbers are just too large and tag articles as you find them. --kingboyk 18:36, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I was specifically asked to take a look at this project; I likely wouldn't have found out about it on my own ;-) Kirill Lokshin 18:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Hey!  How come there's no category for Dead Person? That's discrimination!  On another note, I had no idea there were 100,000 bios on living persons.  That's pretty impressive. Wjhonson 18:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Category:Dead people --kingboyk 18:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's hilarious. I wonder if I'd get a lot of objections by adding that to the pages I edit Wjhonson 18:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If they're still alive, I think you might yes! :) And if they're dead, they probably shouldn't be listed directly in that category anyway. It seems to be a supercategory, with subcategories below for century of death (and death date unknown). --kingboyk 18:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have one I'm working on (Benjamin H. Freedman), the guy is basically really famous for one specific event, which is flooding google and making it hard to find other bio snips, but I'm like a dog with a bone.  I just keep plugging away patching together bits and pieces into a biography.  However, the guy was "born in 1890" (might be slightly suspect by a few years either way), but he is most certainly dead.  I just don't know exactly what year yet.  So I put him in the dead people cat.  Maybe someone can check a Who Was Who or something and come up with a death year. It's a nice place to park dead people until a better, more specific cat can be found. Wjhonson 00:22, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question! I've got some too that I don't know when they died, but they are most certainly dead. Any of the more Wiki-experienced know what to do in cases like this? plange 00:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was working up a guy yesterday Curtis Bean Dall.  Personally I had *never* heard of him before two days ago.  Turns out he was really quite a famous person, in his day.  At any rate, again google is flooded by one specific thing he did.  So I turned to WorldCat which told me the year he was born.  Then since he has such an odd name, I would say "unique", I looked in the Social Security Death Index and boom there he was. Wjhonson 16:41, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  yes WJ Remember I did state that "Some" history seems to be harder to find than "some" other history.-Theblackbay 11:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

text: In the article, sure, but he's referring to categories plange 00:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about a new category for date of death unknown? Maurreen 00:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Category:Year of death missing. Kirill Lokshin 01:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I guess I was a bit vague huh :) I was referring to what year he DIED :) That's what I don't know and don't really have a guess... 1960 to 1990 ? That's a little wild.  The "Abt 1890" is widely reported, but I'd like to see the primary on that to be sure.  There are several "Benjamin Freedman's" who it COULD be, just not sure which one yet.  Hoping to stumble on an obit or something. Wjhonson 00:58, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

text: OK. Kingbotk has started tagging talk pages in :Category:Living people  It will be a fair old job because of the size of the category. To keep things simple, I'm skipping talk pages which already have our template, and those that don't get a simple . Any  present is removed. Later on we can be a bit more sophisticated perhaps, e.g. a category containing musician stubs could have parameters added "class=stub|taskforce=music". I want to avoid that complexity this time round and, besides, I've forgotten more about regular expressions than most people know :) --kingboyk 20:02, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagging talk pages 

message: Articles tagged with importance are not coming up on the chart. Something's not working. Something is rotten in the state of WikiProject Biography. ....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 00:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: yep, I noticed that. Will try to figure that out before 10 PM EST so the bot will grab em plange 00:11, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Importance