Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Archive 2

message: Type Nuttall encyclopedia into Google. We're NUMBER ONE!! Just wait till Friday. ... Danny 01:13, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: This is cool

message: Is Wikipedia missing any World Book articles? If so, can it be added to this project? Dralwik 18:11, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I will work on getting a topic list and see if it can be incorporated into the new hot list Reflex Reaction 19:15, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  World Book Encyclopedia 

message: I wikified the 1911 article and saved it as Silesia (1911 EB). Right now, there seems to be a revert war going on the Silesia page. The point of having both articles is that the EB contains a huge amount of historical information the Polish-dominated Silesia article does not cover.
Is there a policy for such cases?--FourthAve 02:30, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Silesia 

message: Though the original page seems to be broken, I once made a list of topic from the "encyclopedia of reproduction" (believe it or not). It can be found here, in case there is interest to add this to the ever-growing encyclopedias-to-be-redone list :-) --Magnus Manske 17:13, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
:Sure, sounds like a sexy topic. Danny 01:22, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Encyclopedia of reproduction 

message: 2004/Y is chock full of missing Chinese topics, many of which already have articles on zh: . Any ideas on how to get these topics done on en:? It is a hard work for those of us with only a passing knowledge of China, but my previous plea on the Chinese wikipedians noticeboard didn't get much of a response! Pcb21| Pete 11:51, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: We need to harness some of the 1.2 billion

message: I've started a project to provide a Wikipedia entry for all entries in John Lindow's Handbook of Norse Mythology.
User:Haukurth/Handbook
I am intimately familiar with the subject and Wikipedia's coverage of it so I can work on this very efficiently. Anyone is welcome to help, of course. If you want to move the page from my user space and file it under the Missing encyclopedic articles project (if only to brag about it when it is completed) that's fine too :)
Anyhow, just thought I'd let you know since I got the idea from this project.
- Haukurth 18:08, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Handbook of Norse Mythology 

message: I just looked over the "did you know" on the main page, and was very pleased to see that Nurek Dam, made largely by User:Bantman, had the first edit summary as (Created as part of the WikiProject Missing articles project), brilliant!
Anyway, I think it would be great if we put a few examples of really good articles this project has produced on the main project page, partly to show what kind of quality to aspire to, and partly because it will look really cool.
Anyone got any other good examples? Martin - The non-blue non-moose 23:23, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm proud of Qala'un Mosque, if I may say so — a well-researched and complete article. It even exposes a pretty serious error of the Encyclopedia Britannica, as pointed out here. Another good one of mine might be Bono Manso. — mark ✎ 10:47, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You may certainly say so! they are very good articles.Martin - The non-blue non-moose 13:01, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples? 

message: I have sent the following e-mail to Wolfram:
 Dear Mr./Mrs.
 
 We at Wikipedia are trying to create the worlds largest free encyclopedia. This includes information about
 mathematics. To make our encyclopedia as complete as possible be want to make sure that there is an article on
 Wikipedia for every artcile on Mathworld. To help our editors we create a list from your alphabetical index
 (e.g. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/letters/A.html) which show whcih articles have to be written. We thought this
 would be allowed under fair use, but since there have been some concerns that this could actually be a copyright
 violation and have deleted the list as a precausion. It would greatly help if you could give explicit permission
 to us to create this list from your alphabetical index. (To be clear: we do not copy any information from your 
 articles).
 
 
 Yours sincerely,
 
 Rudy Koot
--R.Koot 02:16, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mathworld request 

message: I have made Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/biographies the new weekly focus, after moving it to its own page. We should be able to get through it very quickly with a few more helping hands, as there isn't much left to do, and what is there are often simple (and useful!) redirect or articles that can be made easily. Martin - The non-blue non-moose 11:53, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I may have missed some of the discussion, but — is there really an implied intention to add "Doe, John" as a redirect to "John Doe"? Or is the rule that only one of the links on any line of this list should be blued? I know we agree redirects are good, but... David Brooks 17:47, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the "Doe, John" links are only there because thats what the original (copied) list was like, magnus then converted them to "John Doe" but left the old ones in case they weren't converted propoerly (I assume). Anyway, the moral of the storey is that you don't need to create the "Doe, John" redirects, but it is at your discretion, personally i never do. Martin - The non-blue non-moose 18:10, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New focus 

message: I am working offline on a descendent project - List of medical terms.  It will compile information from various sources, but leave me a message if you are interested or have suggestions. Reflex Reaction 19:11, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have compiled some of the medical terms if anyone is interested in working with it.  It will need some work, but is a decent start. I would work on it more, but I have been busy with the Catholic Encyclopedia project.  Some more info is here   ---- Reflex Reaction 15:53, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Medical encyclopedia, medical terms

message: Has anyone looked into Easton's Bible Dictionary? --Tydaj 23:05, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Easton's

message: I've found several cases in the 1911xmusic list where the link points to an article based on 1911 that has no relevant musical content. I suppose that's just another case of the inherent problem with these lists; their initial creation removed blue links without them necessarily being a topic match. Still, that's no reason not to be vigilant with those we supply in the crossover lists. David Brooks 15:28, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crossover lists 

message: Today I received a reply from MathWorld:
 Rudy,
 
 Thank you for your mail. We appreciate your effort to secure proper  permission before using our material.
 
 Our lists *do* represent  original works of authorship and, as such,  enjoy copyright  protection. Further, the value of our editorial work  is evidenced by your desire to incorporate the material into your  project.
 
 We understand your need for such a list, and we would very much like  to support Wikipedia -- as I am sure you would like to support the  continued development of MathWorld. It is worth noting the relative  dearth of links to Mathworld from Wikipedia.
 
 Regardless, it isn't obvious how reproducing MathWorld (which already  offers unfettered, free access) furthers the goals of Wikipedia.
 
 Are there other areas of mathematics/science that are in greater need  of free web-based exposure that we could help Wikipedia develop?
 
 Benson Dastrup
 Wolfram Research, Inc. 
Does anybody knows what this means? --R.Koot 20:56, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a firm and competitive "no". It denies any value in Wikipedia's open license. In that light the last paragraph is really offering to add content to MathWorld, not Wikipedia. Nevertheless, Mr. Dastrup will find a detailed answer to his question on pages such as Wikipedia:Requested Articles. --Hoziron 03:28, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  MathWorld's reply 

message: I'm wondering what to do about article names on the Hotlist that will never be useful as redirects because they make no sense.  I'm thinking of, for example, Hotlist M8 #109, Milieu, and Moment Race.  This must be a garbled version of Race, Milieu, and Moment (I assume a script mistook it for someone's name), which should have an article and I'll create one shortly.  But should I really create a redirect to it from the weird pagename?  Guidance would be appreciated; thanks.  Chick Bowen 01:01, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No need - just remove it. :) Ambi 01:12, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks. Chick Bowen 01:41, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: On some pages we have started the practice of creating a new section at the bottom for entries we don't think should be included (as opposed to just removing them) because this will help for later "auditing". If you want to be really conservative you could do that, but simple deletion is acceptable too. Pcb21| Pete 12:03, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Odd article names 

message: I've got a cool unit lists that can be included in this project. . Enjoy! =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:05, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Some nice encyclopedic entries, but the usual problem: "We welcome links to our site and fair use of its contents, but reproducing whole entries, illustrations or entire tables from sizes.com requires written permission from Sizes, Inc." . Even lifting out the TOC would be problematic. David Brooks 19:21, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: They can't copyright information. Copyright infringement means that copying text verbatim is illegal. That information does not really belong to them (contrast to table of contents of Nat. Geo. magazines). =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:38, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Units list 

message: "Automatically generated lists with topics wanted in two or more of the above topic lists" is no longer accurate; two of the lists no longer exist. And the descriptions of those crossover lists also refer to those legacy lists. The references should be removed. I can't judge whether we should remove the lists themselves or if they have enough original work to be "safe". Comments? David Brooks 06:34, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned crossover descriptions 

message: You have lists on Articles missing from the French Wikipedia and from the German Wikipedia. I was wondering if it was possible to create such a list for articles from the Spanish Wikipedia, as that would be very helpful with our efforts at Spanish Translation of the Week (we currently have over 80 translators listed on the project page). I'm pretty sure we can tackle this if we have a list. Tell us on the SPATRA talk page, and thanks. Titoxd(?!?) 07:02, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles missing from es:wiki 

message: I am not clear as to the correct procedure when linking personal names, where Wikipedia has a totally different naming convention to earlier (non-internet) encyclopaedias.
For instance in Wikipedia:Evangelical Dictionary of Theology/D  I had three options:
# create a redirect page for such items as Dabney, Robert Lewis
# link thus Dabney, Robert Lewis
# show a link after the EDS article title thus Dabney, Robert Lewis, see Robert Lewis Dabney
I chose the second of these as it seemed to tally better with other usage throughout Wikipedia, but other editors of that page chose the third.  This project page seems to suggest the first but is not clear (under "Find a matching article" there is the paragraph starting "Click on the red link" but also the paragraph starting "For biographies, there are lots of ways to write someone's name"). --PeterR 07:45, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Create redirects. Pcb21| Pete 12:17, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If you also wish to be thorough, a search in Library of Congress authorities will usually provide the forms of a personal name, often with sources for each. That's often a good way to disambiguate personal names and obtain dates, as well. --Hoziron 18:42, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the tip - have made a note of the link. Pcb21| Pete 21:06, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal names - correct procedure? 

message: Probert Encyclopedia  is a short entry encyclopedia (most entries are shorter than 500 words) with over 125,000 entries.  Has/can anyone contact the author about using content from his site in wikipedia?  The material is copyrighted, though there is an earlier version that is floating around that is available for download.  On the wikipedia page, it is listed as for personal use only, but on his website faq  it states: "Other sites you find on the web are unofficial hosts of an early public domain edition of the Probert Encyclopaedia released through the Simtel network of freeware and shareware." (emphasis mine)  While the current list would be ideal, an older version (if public domain) could be used to generate a topic list for this project, and the articles could be used for stubs at the very least.
On a side note I am so bad at creating more work than I am capable of doing, I've had a hand in the Catholic Encyclopedia and the Hotlist and have a list medical terms ready to go.  Reflex Reaction 05:17, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought Wikipedia:List of Encyclopedia topics already contains Probert? Pcb21| Pete 10:55, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Me too, ask Magnus to make sure though. Martin 11:02, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Probert Encyclopedia 

message: I think that the template needs to be updated again.  Projects that have stagnated Jewish Encyclopedia and Music topics should be removed, but new or active topics like Gutenberg or Eastons should be added.  --Reflex Reaction 18:16, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it! Martin 18:34, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Seconded. – Quadell (talk) 22:21, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template talk 

message: I've talked with the founder of Find-A-Grave, and he has provided me the list of "famous people" from their site. I've wikified it. The only problem was that he didn't want the mirror sites of Wikipedia to copy the list and spread it around the internet. It appears that if I put the list on a subpage of my User page, such as User:Brian0918/Sandbox, then it won't get copied. If anyone knows whether or not this is true, let me know. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-10-18 00:43
*I just got this reply from the founder. He knows about third party sites copying and everything, but he still says:
:"Go for it...I'm not worried about it, anymore...The whole point of  the web is to get as much organized info out there as possible...Use  it as you see fit... Thanks and best of luck with the project!"
*So, I guess that's all there is to it. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-10-18 00:45
*:Wow, thats really decent of them. Martin 09:13, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Find-A-Grave

message: I hope I haven't raised any hackles with the reorg of the project page.  I tried to keep the main focus as the missing encyclopedic pages but there are so descendant projects they tend to dominate the page, (it looks like you may be right Bluemoose).  I hope that the categorization and alphabetization will make it a little easer to get around and know what is going on.  Feel free to adjust my "conservative estimate" of how many articles and redirects this project has created, I've only been here for ~4 months and I know that many of you were working hard way before I even knew that wikipedia existed.  --Reflex Reaction 15:17, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, putting them in a "see also" would be better, we can then add the requested articles pages and other similar ones. Martin 19:19, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Me three. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 20:50, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Me four. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 16:15, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorg and additions 

message: After doing the reorganization of the page, I think that some projects either do not belong on this list or should be listed less prominently ("See also" links).  I personally think that many of these projects have been listed here because they share the goal of WP:MEA but are not appropriate for listing under its umbrella.  I think the dividing criteria should be whether it is appropriate for the page to have the project template.  
Not our lists - these are other groups lists that have been added here
* Australian Dictionary of Biography
* Dictionary of Canadian Biography
* Wikipedia:List of missing Africa topics
* List of Asia-related topics - link at Lists of country-related topics
Unknown parentage
* Wikipedia:List of missing Middle Eastern topics 
* Wikipedia:List of quizbowl answers
Generic redlinked lists - There are many lists with redlinks that need to be created but we have specifically have focused on encyclopedic articles.
* List of members of the National Academy of Sciences
* List of Native American tribes
I also think that some of the above lists can be retained if we "make them our own", but I think that the project has gotten away from its original goal of coverage of missing encyclopedic articles.  I have avoided any list that has the   because they were clearly created for this project and identifying topics worthy of coverage.  Comments or complaints are welcome. --Reflex Reaction 18:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, putting them in a "see also" would be better, we can then add the requested articles pages and other similar ones. Martin 19:19, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Me three. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 20:50, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Me four. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 16:15, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Problem lists