Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Discworld

message: Can Mort the book (currently at Mort (novel)) be at Mort?  No disambig needed right now, and if the character and book are to be described in the same article... hfool/Wazzup? 03:38, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote a bit of an explanation of my thinking.  Then I thought it probably is best at Mort with the character at Mort (Discworld).  I'll get on to it when I get back later. violet/riga (t) 11:59, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mort 

message: When looking the titles for the translations for differnet languages on for exemple The Colour of Magic I saw that the Swedish title was incorrecrtly capitalised (the correct is "Magins färg"). Now I have no idea about capitlisation rules in other languages than Swedish and English. It would be nice if we could fix these somehow. - Jeltz talk 20:25, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no idea about capitalisation in the other languages and have kept away from the translation section so far.  Perhaps the editor that placed them there got them from another source – I'll take a look and see if I can find anything about this. violet/riga (t) 21:43, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect translated titles

message: I've noticed (and fixed) several links to lspace.org pages that led to the www.ie.lspace.org subdomain, rather than the more generic www.lspace.org one. The latter is preferred for loadbalancing and the like, and redirects to an appropriate server. See also its mirrors page. Joeno 15:45, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: Is it ok to just grab all of them from amazon.co.uk? Orange Goblin 21:24, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox book covers 

message: What about some of the other books etc that have been released to coincide with the Discworld series?  I'm referring particularly to the various maps, diaries and Nanny Ogg's Cook Book.  Where do they fit in? -- Francs2000 | Talk  01:33, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maps and Diaries etc 

message: In the Discworld books Death talks in small caps. At present there is no automatic way to do this in the wiki markup.
It is possible though, with a little patience. Any quotes by Death are typed in capitals, and then enclosed with  and  tags, with the exception of what would normally be capital letters.
:I WAS SURPRISED THAT YOU JOSTLED ME, RINCEWIND, FOR I HAVE AN APPOINTMENT WITH THEE THIS VERY NIGHT.*
This can be achieved with the following markup:
 I WAS SURPRISED THAT YOU JOSTLED ME,
RINCEWIND, FOR I HAVE
AN APPOINTMENT WITH THEE THIS VERY NIGHT.
I'm not sure how many quotes by Death are in Wikipedia articles, nor if there is any plan to include any, but I thought it would be useful to standardise them.
*When Death speaks, quote marks are not used.
-=# Amos E Wolfe talk #=- 01:35, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death Speaks 

message: A new Discworld-related wiki has been started, hosted at Lspace.org:
*http://wiki.lspace.org
A couple of Wikipedia users have already found it and registered. We hope to see you all over there really soon.
:-=# Amos E Wolfe talk #=- 01:00, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discworld Wiki

message: Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-Class and good B-Class articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles on Discworld? We are also looking for featured articles. Please post your suggestions here. Cheers!--Shanel 21:09, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project

message: While browsing some of the Discworld articles, I noticed that there were pronunciation guides not written in the IPA. Being unfamiliar with IPA, I feel unable to correct them, however they probably should be done. Two I noticed were Lancre and Magrat Garlick. QmunkE 10:23, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  IPA Pronunciations 

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages: 
*User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
*User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
*User:Badbilltucker/Science directory
and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory.
The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. 
It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 22:24, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now moved the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 14:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project Directory 

message: To give some coherency to the many little sf-oriented communities on Wikipedia.--ragesoss 20:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New WikiProject: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Science Fiction]]

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards 

message: ... has been created at Portal:Discworld (where else?). Although the foundations have been laid, it sill needs work. Tompw (talk) 21:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Some more help would be apreciated. Tompw (talk) (review) 21:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Discworld Portal... 

message: I've created an article for the AM$, and I'd appreciate anything anyone can add. I've included a table of other currencies in there, and I think it could do with being moved to a different article. If anyone has any ideas, please leave a message on the discussion page of the article Monkeymox 12:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AM$ 

message: The infobox for City Watch calls the short story "Theatre of Cruelty" the second City Watch Story, and calls Men at Arms the third, which is all well and good except that a) Men at Arms and "Theatre of Cruelty" were both published in 1993, and there's no indication of publishing order, and b)  the reading list in the Discworld article only includes the novels, not the short stories, which implies the reading order is contingent only on the novels, while the reading list includes everything.  So there's a discrepancy somewhere, as I have always been under the impression that only the novels had a reading order, as the short stories were not available outside where they were published until recently.  I'd change it mtself, but I don't know which is right. MSJapan 01:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this was corrected, but unfortunately an IP has been going about changing it back.  So we now have an unfortunate situation where the infobox says one thing and the reading order guide says another (The Fifth Elephant, for example).  I think the confusion has arisen because if you are counting Watch stories then Theatre of Cruelty is included, but if you are counting Watch novels then obviously it should not.  Perhaps it's just a terminology issue, but whatever it is, I hope we can sort it out.  Geoff B 05:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox discrepancy 

message: This AFD may be of interest to members of this wikiproject: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GURPS Discworld. Percy Snoodle 12:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a ton of possible references to the talk page. I need help (aka someone who doesn't have those sites blocked while they are at work) to go through them and see if they can help establish notability. Turlo Lomon 13:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GURPS Discworld AfD 

message: I have created Technology of the Discworld - improvements, expansion and additions welcome. --Helenalex (talk) 01:44, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Technology 

message: For correcting in universe style are we trying to remove jokes or conversational bits from the books? i.e. trying to (while maintaining a grip on the real world) analyse the topic encyclopedically.Beligaronia (talk) 04:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I took it to mean not talking about characters events etc as if we lived in the Discworld. I would have thought jokes were fine. --Helenalex (talk) 08:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's it exactly.  Compare Troy McClure (a FA) with what we've currently got for Death (Discworld).  The two articles have much the same potential; the difference is in how it's presented.  We're looking to have a lot more material about Death's appearances in the books, how he's important to the storylines, etc; not extensive description and sentences beginning with "Death is...".  Just changing that to "Death is portrayed as..." is a good start.  It's a perspective thing.  Jokes and humour (Death being fond of curry, etc) are an integral part of the Discworld series and we'd be doing it a disservice not to include them; but we're trying to stay professional at the same time.  I think that Death (Discworld) is an easy GA candidate with a fairly moderate amount of work: perhaps that's a good place to start. Happy‑melon 11:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

text: I agreeWhere is WikiResearch? (talk)
I think one of the things to be considered here is that the Discworld is an extension of our own world ('What if this was?',wheras Springfield would be more of a parody - 'What if this happened?', although both are largely social commentaries). It even goes so far as to contain our world (see The Science oof Discworld 1,2 and 3) and be visited by Rincewind and Twoflower in The Colour of Magic (this is not to say I believe that it's real).
Also, having read the Troy McClure article, your point seems moot as it is largely written from an in-universe perspective and contains many examples of "Troy McClure was ..." and "McClure's ...". This makes it a much easier article to read than if (for example the first line of Role) it read "Troy McClure is portrayed as a stereotypical Hollywood has-been." or "The most prominent episode featuring Troy McClure" (from Reception) as it allows the reader to emote to the character on a much more personal level.
The in-universe perspective should be kept to allow for these and to enhance the flow of information. The last thing we want is for these articles to start reading like technical manuals. Remember they are about fictional literature and not scientific fact, meaning that to truly understand a character you have to be able to see things from his point of view (yet another point - I will be removing many of the extraneous POV tags).  Where is WikiResearch? (talk) 13:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  In universe style 

message: As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level.  The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
*The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.  
*The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.  
*A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.  
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at :Category:C-Class_articles.  If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages.  The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles. 
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme.  This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year.  Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 22:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

message: The reason I'm asking is that Death (Discworld) had a broken image for TEN DAYS until I happened to visit the article and fix it. Exxolon (talk) 19:27, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt that. It looks very deserted, which is very sad. Someone who knows AWB should post a notice on talk pages of all members to see if we could revive some... So#Why review me! 17:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this project still active? 

message: A lot of people have been enquiring as to the font used in the English and US Disworld novels.... could we find out? 86.155.53.220 07:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends on the book. Making Money for example uses in hardcover/UK "11.75/15pt Minion", Nightwatch in hardcover/UK uses "11/14,5pt Meridien". So there is no regular font, it's printed in the beginning mostly. So#Why review me! 17:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Font? 

message: Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations. 
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible. 
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Discworld 

message: Nearly all Discworld articles seem to have few to no sources, little assertion of notability, and heavily in-universe topic. Furthermore, there are whole articles devoted to obscure or even non-appearing characters such as Bloody Stupid Johnson. Even major characters, like Death (Discworld) or the books themselves lack acceptable sources - sometimes even sources at all!
I personally love Pratchett's novels. I'm not doing this because I dislike the topic, I'm doing it because I know that there is potential for Discworld to be a featured topic. However, many of the articles that exist now are the sort that are really only appropriate for a fan-wiki like wikia, not a professionally encyclopedic one like wikipedia. Some of the topics I've worked on in the past, like Digimon, benefited from having their less encyclopedic content exported to a wikia.
I'm not going to be able to really help with this at all, since I have permanent access to all of one book, and am busy with other projects. But I do think this project needs a wake up call - what kind of Discworld article is it that doesn't have notations?Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 02:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the problem is that this project is dead. Deader than dead. Someone needs to try and wake it up but unless a dozen people or so are ready and willing to work on it, I doubt you will find much help. I will see if I can write up something to post to all participants using AWB or similar. Regards SoWhy 12:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

text: There is an active fan wiki Discworld & Pratchett Wiki if articles need to be exported. As far as I can think of there are no sources for Discworld beyond the books themselves. How does one go about citing a book? (I am new to wikipedia)--Beligaronia (talk) 19:18, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is unfortunately the case that this project is largely inactive, so probably not as useful as it once was.  However, it's still a good place to ask questions and receive answers.  In this case, it is indeed often difficult to find external sources for articles on characters, locations, etc; this is usually an indication that the article simply doesn't belong here!  There are a lot of our articles that will eventually need to be exported to wikia, as Beligaronia says.  That said, google is always a good source of sources! If you find a particularly useful external reference, do be sure to drop a note here so it can be used in other articles if possible. Happy‑melon 18:49, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There's nothing wrong with using the books as sources. For example, if you're going to say that a character does something, then it's fine to cite the specific instance from a particular book. It would be a bit absurd to say 'In Reaper Man, the wizards temporarily become very macho' and then cite it to a secondary source rather than to Reaper Man. There are a few basic citations in Technology of the Discworld which I think are fine, for example, although there needs to be more of them. --Helenalex (talk) 03:01, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, it would be silly not to use the books to reference such 'facts'.  The issue is that such references can't be used to prove the notability of topics like fictional characters, locations, events, etc.  You might want to read WP:FICT if you're unfamiliar with the concept; of course if you've already done so then you're aware of the issues. Happy‑melon 11:00, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  The problem of your point is that multiple books and other sources have been written that goes with the WP:FICT guidelines.  rdunn 15:07, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, I don't entirely understand.  The "policy"/"guidline" argument is one that I simply won't participate in, it's IMO completely asinine.  However, it is irrelevant to this case: if, as you say, there is a supply of secondary sources to reference these articles, then my comment above does not apply to them.  For topics for which there are no reliable secondary sources, WP:FICT is as depressingly confused as always . WPDiscworld is certainly not as bad at covering in-universe topics as many other fictional WikiProjects. Happy‑melon 17:01, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Basically, as I've been reading through the articles, I've been repairing links and adding references (though mainly the links - easier to spot big red writing than the lack of a small number) and referring pretty much everything to (wiki.)l-space.org. This may be naughty of me to do, but all the fans (and Pratchett himself) regard The L-Space Web as one of the premier resources for all things Discworld.
Alternatively, I have referenced the books (where applicable) when the matter concerns one of the main themes of the book.Where is WikiResearch? (talk) 14:08, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability and Unsourced 

message: Which paperback edition should be mentioned on Wintersmith? --141.3.48.218 (talk) 13:55, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably the first, unless later editions are notable in their own right (eg, if they include significant changes or corrections). Happy‑melon 16:09, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wintersmith 

message: I went though the list of articles which hadn't yet been assessed and gave them all a rating on the quality scale.
While of course these ratings are only my opinion, so people may well disagree with some of my choices, i hope it's at least been of some help.
I've also added a few infoboxes to a couple of short story articles and character articles i noticed were missing one. Haven't been able to fill all of them in completely though.
MrTrent9484 (talk) 02:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quality scale ratings and infoboxes. 

message: Hi!  I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate.  This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group.  If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinators' working group 

message: A lot of the Discworld content is unreferenced (or cited only to primary sources) and in-universe plot summary without assertion of notability. Active WikiProject members should consider merging (and trimming, in the process) and redirecting content into appropriate Lists of X (e.g. List of Discworld locations, List of Discworld characters, etc.). I think the location articles/stubs would be a good starting place, since those mostly aren't overwhelmingly large and would be easy enough to merge. Really, I think it likely only the Discworld itself and Ank-Morpork are likely to have sufficient third-party commentary and information to meet the notability threshold. --EEMIV (talk) 19:25, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree entirely. I think there are already lists of characters and locations; they just need to be tidied and expanded with more stub articles. Happy‑melon 09:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup, I saw those; I'll probably do some merge/redirecting here in the next couple of weeks. --EEMIV (talk) 11:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amalgamating (and trimming) into appropriate Lists of X 

message: Hi I was just going through the books and would really love it if there where prev and next links to jump between books, something like what they do for magic the gathering sets. Shards_of_Alara
What do people think?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThrawnDa (talk • contribs) 17:46, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a terrible idea, but would you suggest following the suggested reading order, the chronological release dates, or grouping by in universe groups (each Watch book follows to the next and previous Watch book etc)-- WORMMЯOW  07:30, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: there already is sommat like that.  rdunnPLIB  10:44, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prev and Next Links 

message: This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP 1.0 bot announcement 

message: ;List of cleanup articles for your project
If you don't already have this and are interested in creating a list of articles which need cleanup for your wikiproject see:  Cleanup listings A list of examples is here
;Moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation pages" 
If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles to a special "incubation page",  contact me, User talk:Ikip
;Watchlisting all unreferenced articles
If you are interested in watchlisting all of the unreferenced articles once you install Cleanup_listings, contact me, User talk:Ikip
Ikip  02:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

message: The above page has been deleted. This may have been for a very good reason but has left a lot of broken links which now have nowhere to go but external. I have been repairing what I can but there are many more left and would suggest either the un-deletion of the page or a concerted effort to repair all of the links in all 221 articles (So far I've managed most of the Gods and Characters - but I've been reading them as I've been going along and not just repairing)Where is WikiResearch? (talk) 14:19, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor Discworld Concepts

message: Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone.  Articles were selected based on their assessed  importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Discworld articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details.  You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010.  As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide.  Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback! 
For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 22:22, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discworld articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release 

message: Portal:Children's literature is at portal peer review. Review comments are welcome, at Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Children's literature/archive1. -- Cirt (talk) 19:03, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Discworld novels in the main are not kids novels (with the exception of the Tiffany Aching novels).Angry Mustelid (talk) 02:08, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portal:Children's literature at peer review 

message: I'm not sure what's going on at Discworld characters but at the least, attribution to all the editors in the history seemed to have been lost by this merger. Is this something you can look at? Regards, Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discworld characters 

message: Welcome to the Wikipedia Book of Discworld. Please feel free to add anything else you think is appropriate. Cheers Paul MacDermott (talk) 21:22, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Book:Discworld]] 

message: There's a discussion at Talk:Genua (disambiguation) concerning whether the Discworld city is the primary topic for "Genua". PamD 17:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genua 

message: #Portal:Children's literature
#Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Children's literature
I've nominated Portal:Children's literature to be considered for Featured Portal quality.
This was a joint quality improvement collaboration between myself and User:Wadewitz.
Participation would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Children's literature.
Thank you for your time,
— Cirt (talk) 17:21, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portal:Children's literature for Featured Portal candidacy 

message: Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment on the WikiProject X proposal 

message: Nac Mac Feegle was deleted at an AfD earlier this year, and I have asked for it to be userified to my space at User:Jclemens/Nac Mac Feegle.  It needs references, which I can do relatively easily, but it also needs some trimming, focusing, and OR removal.  Can anyone help? Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 22:13, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nac Mac Feegle 

message: Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject X is live! 

message: *Lie-to-children
I've embarked on a Quality improvement project for Lie-to-children, first introduced as a phrase in The Science of Discworld.
If you've got recommendations for additional secondary sources that could be utilized to further improve the quality of the article, please suggest them at Talk:Lie-to-children.
Thank you for your time,
— Cirt (talk) 02:34, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quality improvement project - Lie-to-children 

message: The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.
Portals are being redesigned.
The new design features are being applied to existing portals.
At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template .
The discussion about this can be found here.
Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass.  Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.
=== Background ===
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace.  On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you.     — The Transhumanist    07:34, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject collaboration notice from the [[WP:WPPORT|Portals WikiProject]] 

message: On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace.  On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you.     — The Transhumanist    07:34, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background 

message: See Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Portal:Discworld for details. Tompw (talk) 16:04, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discworld portal is up for deletion 

message: Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for information on WP1.0 web tool