Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias/Archive 3

message: One comment in Votes for deletion is that it is a bit wordy. Any suggestions for reducing it to two lines?
Currently the limited geographical scope template is very general. However do we want to split it up into more specific templates?
*Americo-centric
*Anglo-american centric
*Developed world centric
This subdivision would provide more information and would mean we would have three categories of articles rather than just one, which might be useful if as I expect we tag lots of articles.
:I don't really see the value of further division into geographic subcategories, but if anyone can explain the benefits I surely won't veto. There will be quite a number of borderline cases (e.g. most of the article talks about the U.S. only, but someone has added a single sentence on the situation in Poland).
:On the other hand, I would say it is often possible to distinguish two slightly different types of internal bias: 1. The article talks about a general term and pretends to deal with it from a general perspective, without giving any geographical references at all, but it is obvious that it is written from a Western cultural perspective (e.g. Adoption). 2. The article deals with the situation in specific countries, but examples are limited to a few countries, normally in the developing world (e.g. Freedom of speech). (There will be some cases where both 1. and 2. applies, i.e. where there is a general definitition written from a Western perspective, followed by examples from the U.S. and the UK only.) I propose the following two template texts, based on this distinction:
::1. This article needs attention: it currently deals with its topic mainly from a developed world perspective. See the talk page for further explanation. If you can widen the perspective of WikiProject Countering systemic bias, please consider editing the article.
::2. This article needs attention: the examples currently provided represent a limited number of countries in the developed world only. See the talk page for further explanation. If you can widen the perspective of WikiProject Countering systemic bias, please consider editing the article.
:The proposed texts have the benefit that they are both slightly shorter than the original template text. I've added "See the talk page for further explanation" since my opinion is that we should strongly encourage anyone adding the template to an article to further explain the reasons for doing so on the article's talk page, to prevent misunderstandings. Such talk page comments could also refer to our project page for further information. This would have the added benefit of being an excellent way to advertise the CSB project. Alarm 13:06, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks a lot for creating the template. You're probably right in advocating using a single one. However, with the hope of not seeming overly stubborn, I would like to conserve a bit more of the wording from version 1 in the merged version. I think that only mentioning examples in the first sentence might give a casual readers the impression that the best, or even the only, way to give the article a "more global perspective" is to add country-specific examples from the developing world. In several cases this would be a misunderstanding, since the main problem is that the general definition is written from a Western perspective assumed by the author to be globally applicable. Although it might seem a minor change, I still would think it to be an improvement to say This article needs attention: the general perspective and/or specific examples represent a limited number of countries in the developed world only. Alarm 16:14, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Wording

message: The Wikipedia community considers the subject of this article important to the encyclopedia.  However, the article is currently too short.  Please consider [ editing it] and sharing your knowledge.
Do we need a template to say this article is important because it represents systemic bias within Wikipedia. Some variation on the  template, i.e., to the right.
This particularly template is controversial; because it says something is important without saying why; but can we think of a more acceptable wording that adds our concern that it is a poor article because of systemic bias within Wikipedia?
:Would it be acceptable to refer to the CSB project and just say we've chosen to target it, instead of expressing the value judgement that it is important? Hence, something like:
::This is an article targeted by the WikiProject Countering systemic bias as in need of expansion. Please see the project page for more information. If you know anything about X, please consider editing the article.
:With this wording, it will also be possible to apply the template to non-stubs.  Alarm 13:12, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The wording seems OK. Would this potentially go on all articles where there is bias (95% of Wikipedia)? Or just on the weeks chosen articles? Also, in regard to the Limited Geographic template above, would it not be better to have an template for each of the sections in systemic bias (Developing, female, agriculture, limited geographic etc), all having a standard 'systemic bias' template design? That might make it easier to understand. --- Xed 15:05, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: I'm not entirely sure what you mean by standard design - text content or style attributes (color etc.)? Regarding the latter, I agree, but that seems more or less to be the case already. As for the former, I have no problem amending the "in need of expansion" template with categories, e.g. "This is an article dealing with the developing world, targeted ... etc. However, I think the "limited scope" category is of quite a different art, calling for a different text (and referring to the corresponding talk page for further explanation) in both the "developed world perspective" and the "limited number of countries" case. Does this make sense to anybody else? Alarm 20:09, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The text you proposed ('This is an article targeted by the CSB...') looks fine to me. It is put nicely and avoids the chance of being misused. And I agree with you on the fact that the (important) limited scope category is something different entirely. However, I don't know about reusing the old importantstub template. And I think there's something in what Xed is saying too. Maybe there should be a set of systemic bias templates: one template for articles that simply need expansion, another template for articles with limited scope, etcetera. In that case, I wouldn't build upon the old importantstub but create a brand-new consistent set of systemic bias templates (of which your still adequate wording would form a part).  - Strangeloop (talk) 20:57, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: There seems to be a rough consensus. Could some template wizard put together a template for the CSM collaboration of the week, to put at the top of Congo Civil War, using the following wording (adapted from Alarms suggestion): This article is the WikiProject Countering systemic bias Collaboration of the Week, and has been targeted as being in need of expansion. Please see the project page for more information. Please consider editing the article.? The other articles in the To Do list need Alarms exact wording. - Xed 12:40, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: On my browsers (IE and Safari, Mac OS X), the image has an unsightly white border on the top, left and bottom (but not right) for some reason. I tried fiddling with the markup (using preview not save), but I couldn't get it to work. I originally threw the image together for the Limited Geographic Scope section, but if it's suitable as a general CSM badge that's fine. - Xed 22:00, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I get the white border too, and it doesn't look at all good. But if it is possible to fix that, it would look good in the template. Alarm 16:19, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I really like the symbolism of the image and suggest we adopt it as the emblem of the project. :ChrisG 17:51, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Systemic bias important article template

message: I notice the wording on the Limited geographic scope template has now been changed according to my suggestion. I think all the templates are fine now. If there is consensus on this, maybe they should be announced on Village Pump, as was previously suggested, before we start using them widely? Alarm 18:30, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've given them a new lick of paint and think they're ready. A couple of questions below though--Xed 20:56, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: I like the new look - Strangeloop (talk) 08:29, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I might make the logo a little larger later, about the size of the logo here: Template:PD-USGov-NASA, but I think it's ready to go live now. - Xed 08:43, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: I agree with ChrisG. Alarm 07:35, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: I agree with you two - Strangeloop (talk) 08:29, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: Again, I agree with ChrisG. Alarm 07:36, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: I agree with ChrisG and Alarm - Strangeloop (talk) 08:29, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Templates ready for announcement?

message: Does this go on all articles which match this description, or just ones on the to-do template, or all articles in Limited Geo section?
I think it should go on all the articles that are in the limited geographic section. This template is particularly good for pointing out to existing contributors that it has limited perspectives, and involving them. It is also a good advert. :ChrisG
:I agree with ChrisG. Alarm 07:35, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you two - Strangeloop (talk) 08:29, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Template:Limitedgeographicscope

message: All CSB articles, or just ones being targeted by the To-Do template?
All CSB articles other than Limited geographic which is more specific. :ChrisG 00:21, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, I agree with ChrisG. Alarm 07:36, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: I agree with ChrisG and Alarm - Strangeloop (talk) 08:29, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Template:CSBArticles

message: We now have at least one article (Adrienne Monnier) which has no content other than the template. With my sysop hat on, I'm tempted to delete it. Please only add the templates to articles that already exist! Filiocht 10:51, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
:I have created a stub to save the page from deletion. Filiocht 11:01, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
:Sorry, that was me being over-ethusiastic. --Xed 11:37, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Template madness