Wikipedia talk:WikiProject History

message: Hi everyone. I am writing to ask for any volunteers who might like to get more involved here at WikiProject History. Right now, we would like to get WikiProject History up and running again. A number of people have signed up in the past, and indicated their willingness to be involved. If you're still here, feel free to reply here. You can reply here in this section, even if it's just to say hello. If you want, you can simply let me know what you are personally working on right now. or also, if you want, you can let me know what your interests are, what topics you find interesting, what you;d like to do, or how you'd like to be involved. whatever it may be, we'd like to hear from you. we appreciate it. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 14:55, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for posting and calling out. Community building can be a challenge. My view is that if a WikiProject manages to attract 3 people who post once a month, then that is the foundation for being ready for newcomer comments and engagement. All this works better if none of those three go far out of their usual routine and if they also watch for comments. I am unable to be around regularly myself, but I will be a sport and post a challenge for now.  Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:38, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , that's terrific. thanks for your reply. yes, that's totally fine. a little interaction is all we need to keep things moving along here. it is great to hear from you. whatever frequency is feasible for individuals is totally fine here. our main goal is simply to get different views over time. your note is very helpful. thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 17:56, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been watching this page for a while, and it's nice to see a little activity around here – it has been seeming a little moribund lately.  I agree with Blue Raspberry – you don't need that many posts for a project to reach a critical mass of activity where people start looking at it regularly.  Take WP:CGR – there are only about 5 new discussions posted on the talk page per month, but while a few of those are notices of discussions elsewhere, most of them do actually lead to discussion on the talk page itself.  And if you hang about there, you will notice the same names coming up again and again in discussions.  I suspect the same is true of other active wikiprojects – there are a few regular contributors who keep discussions going, which makes anyone else who looks in feel as though it's worth watching the page. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:20, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  those are great points. I appreciate your ideas and input here. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 00:16, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

text: Glad to see the initiative and jumping in to say that this talk page is now on my watchlist too.  I do not have much experience with article assessment or other WikiProject-specific tasks, but history is one of my areas of interest, and I do work on a lot of history-related articles, so it's good to know that this space can possibly be used as a resource/sounding board for related questions when/if they come up.--MattMauler (talk) 16:21, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

text: I've been lurking around here for a bit now. I have some older accounts that apparently weren't linked to my email, hence why my account says it was created today. I would personally love to contribute, but I frankly have no idea where to start. Any pointers would be appreciated! If it helps, I am most interested in the period from roughly 1800 onward. Lord Dweebington1 (talk) 04:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject History needs you!!!! 

message: I gave a go at compiling ~99 articles as an attempt at a canon of world history.
*:meta:Wiki99/world history
Suppose that we imagine a class of educated people who receive a bachelor's degree or equivalent from a university and who have some liberal arts training. This class of people intends to participate in the globalized workforce, with many individuals having a career which includes international collaboration with at least one foreign culture and the collective cohort including individuals who collaborate with every major culture on earth. What 100 topics are useful for such people to know globally? Are there topics which we should expect 95%+ of all such people to know?
For example, can a person be university educated, and traveling around the world doing business or work projects, and participate fully in society if they are completely ignorant that certain classical civilizations ever existed, or that there was a time of colonization, and an age of slavery, and international relations through history? In compiling this list, I attempted to choose topics which both are part of multiple cultures' histories, and which represent most people on earth the most often, and which track the chain of progress through history.
It is not easy to compile lists of this sort and I am sure many people could criticize it. If anyone has criticism, then I would especially like feedback on who has also compiled such a list, if anyone can identify any such similar project for global translation of a canon, and how anyone balanced the representation of the list.
Thanks.  Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:00, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: @Bluerasberry Not bad. Of course I'd nitpick some stuff. history of Tonga, Thailand, Afghanistan, South Africa, Ethipia, West Africa, seem way too minor to include (one article for history by continent would be best, there is history of Europe but not history of Asia?? Also history of Africa, Middle East, Americas...). History of slavery is a minor topic that represents recent Western bias, same for genocides in history (I'd rather go with history of war, history of crime), similar issues I'd see with feminism and human sexuality (human rights too - but I'd keep the latter one as an overarching topic here). History of religion is fine, but dedicating 9 articles to this, probably too much by half if not eight. Listing Native American religion which doesn't exist is a clear evidence of bias (it's a very minor topic for everyone except some American historians); history of United States is much more important and not listed (?). I am not an American but let's face it, US is one of the most important country in the world's history. To have history of China and Russian Empire but not history of US, well, this is a history as endorsed by Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin :P On a side note, take a look at Western canon, very interesting topic, very biased - and then note we don't have an article on world canon. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:01, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki99 for world history

message: :Hi! I'm a new member. I joined because I have an interest in improving the religion section, particularly when it comes to including old/lesser-known religions in the religion tree/template. Glad to be here! ArcticSolstice (talk) 15:18, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  New member introductions 

message: * Hi I’m interested in history of all places and periods. The areas I’m most keen to work in are Middle Eastern history and European colonial history. I’m very interested in China and Japan and can help tidy up articles about them, but can’t read Chinese or Japanese sources. Mccapra (talk) 11:24, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Please add your introductory comments below

message: Grüß Gott,I am Vami_IV (call me Vami), an editor of seven years and some change with a few Featured Articles to show for it. At time of writing, all of these are architecture articles in Germany and the United States; that's a pretty good summation of my area of most competent interest. That said, I've been awarded a Quarter-Million Award for American military history and am currently working on Simón Bolívar, so history interests me generally. I am also a semi-active member of Women in Red, where I primarily translate articles for Latin American women. To wit, the extent of my WP:HIST-related editing spans from the Early Middle Ages to the present, and mostly in the Americas and Europe.At 's request, I'm here to volunteer my time as a Project Coordinator here at WP:HIST. As an acting Coordinator over at WP:MILHIST like  (courtesy ping) and Key Editor  (ditto), I believe I'll make a good fit here. As an added bonus, I have now plenty of experience collaborating with editors on-wiki and on the Discord server to compile research and improve articles. As a Coordinator and a member of the Collaboration Group, I'd be focusing my efforts there and with busywork like assessing articles. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 02:57, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: *Support. Although actually you are a bit too modest. take a look at this, folks! User:Vami IV/Awards.  well done. glad to have you here!!! Sm8900 (talk) 03:18, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

text: *Support. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:17, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Application for WikiProject History Coordinator: Vami_IV 

message: * First off, there is a problem here, and the problem is that the articles are in rough shape.  I don't think it's an easily fixable problem because the core question is inclusion / due weight.  Almost anything important enough to even consider discussing in a top-level world history article has copious references, but the real question is whether to mention it at all, whether it gets one sentence or one paragraph, and so on.  Encyclopedia articles already greatly compress other works like books, even general overview texts.  So...  there's going to be a decent amount of editorial difference between just how much to talk about the French Revolution or the like.  But "doing it right" would involve finding scholarly sources explicitly covering huge time periods and comparing them to see what they most often have in common or the like to make sure the due weight is covered.
* That said, I disagree with Peter Isotalo's idea that the articles are a COATRACK, or original research, or something. Wikipedia is explicitly allowed to arbitrarily subdivide topics however it likes - this is not "original research" but rather content organization no different from what editors do all the time.  It's trivial to show historians using the term "Early modern" (a gazillion hits on Google Books - saying that you don't like Google Books misses the point, it being used in less prestigious books still says something important), and the reason "Late modern" doesn't come up that often is that the era is usually referred to more specifically.  But its meaning is clear enough.  If you consider that this topic really is something like Modern era, except split across year boundaries, the articles really mean Modern era (1500-1800), Modern era (1800-1945), and Modern era (1945-present).  Which is fine.
* To the extent there is an issue, I'd say that Late modern period should just explicitly say it really means, for Wikipedia purposes, World history from 1800-1945 and more decisively cut out anything post WW2.  SnowFire (talk) 16:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Section break 2

message: User:Buidhe has nominated Unification of Germany for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR for unification of Germany 

message: Hi, need your help. There's discussion regarding what to call result in Polish-Ukrainian conflict in 1940s. Partially discussion took place here as well. Dƶoxar (talk) 11:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish-Ukrainian conflict in 1940s 

message: Would like editor's thoughts on this claim:
* "Humans have lived in societies without formal hierarchies long before the establishment of states, realms, or empires."
:
Discussion here:
*Talk:Anarchism#Claim:_"Humans_have_lived_in_societies_without_formal_hierarchies_long_before_the_establishment_of_states,_realms,_or_empires."
--David Tornheim (talk) 07:28, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hierarchy 

message: I have set up :Category:decade overviews as a set of categories, as well as articles, and navboxes, as part of WikiProject History Contemporary History task force, which I chair. 
Please feel free to contact me any time, with any comments, ideas or questions. thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 14:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decade overviews 

message: Kaunas Fortress has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article reassessment for [[Kaunas Fortress]] 

message: There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Weaponization of antisemitism#Requested move 21 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 02:07, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move at [[Talk:Weaponization of antisemitism#Requested move 21 April 2024]] 

message: Hello,Please note that Exploration, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! 
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement! 

message: There is a Merge discussion at Talk:Racism#Merge from Racial discrimination that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. HudecEmil (talk) 08:32, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge discussion from [[Racial discrimination]] to [[Racism]] 

message: There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Tamil Genocide#Requested move 2 May 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 (talk) 10:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move at [[Talk:Tamil Genocide#Requested move 2 May 2024]] 

message: There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Guru Tegh Bahadur involving a "Historiography" section. I'd like a member of this Wikiproject to weigh in on the matter. Thanks for any help! WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expert attention needed 

message: I'd like to propose merging the following inactive WikiProjects categorised under history into Wikipedia:WikiProject History:
* Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies
* Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonialism
* Wikipedia:WikiProject Dacia
* Wikipedia:WikiProject Dates
* Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle Ages
* Wikipedia:WikiProject Colonialism
The process is outlined here but basically amounts to converting the inactive WikiProjects to task forces of WP History one and merging/moving all of its templates and categories accordingly.
Hopefully this would bring a bit more life into these subjects and direct editors interested in them to an active group of editors rather than a moribund talk page. It could also help drive more traffic to this project. – Joe (talk) 09:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea, also see from many moons ago!  ——Serial Number 54129 11:15, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: As SN says. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:48, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge inactive history WikiProjects 

message: This issue was discussed at Talk:Outline of the history of the United States#Move. I think the standard formatting of titles for these articles and categories should be "Outline/Timeline of the history of [country]". The standard title for history articles is "History of [country]", so for consistency, timeline/outline articles naturally should be an extension of said titles, so they are easier to find. It also avoids demonym ambiguity. But a large number of articles currently have the demonym formatted title; see :Category:Timelines by country. We should establish consensus here to put in the edit summary of all page moves, before I start moving a large number of pages. HertzDonuts (talk) 20:18, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standard formatting of titles for outline/timeline articles and categories 

message: Article is pretty messy and needs more people to look at it and work on it. More high quality and hopefully academic sources are needed. Harizotoh9 (talk) 04:28, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners]] 

message: I have nominated The Slave Community for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 23:37, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR for The Slave Community 

message: There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Timeline of the Donald Trump presidency#Requested move 26 May 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 04:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move at [[Talk:Timeline of the Donald Trump presidency#Requested move 26 May 2024]]