Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Marching band

message: I know this page is getting really slow in activity, but I still want to join in. I've looked around and there are no places I can do it that says participate. Is there any catch? Thanks! --TheDrumMajor (talk) 21:35, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  How do I join? 

message: I'd like to propose that we use similar article naming conventions as Wikipedia:WikiProject College football and Wikipedia:WikiProject College basketball where the general format would be "University of Foo Band Name Here".   An example would be Washington State University Cougar Marching Band.  There are some existing articles such as Marching Illini that would become University of Illinois Marching Illini with a redirect since the name is specific enough.  Less specific cases like "Cougar Marching Band" would likely be disambiguation pages pointing eventually to a number of band pages. -- Upholder 20:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me. I support the idea. —Wordbuilder 20:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree, though there are quite a number of University Bands that have or use what would be non-standard names.  I hope supporters don't get too fired up, when we get it all set up.--Rocksanddirt 15:56, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know of any examples where the convention couldn't be used. For example, Texas Tech's band is the Goin' Band from Raiderland. So, using this convention, the article would be moved to Texas Tech University Goin' Band from Raiderland. The stub I just created for Baylor's Golden Wave Band is Baylor University Golden Wave Band. —Wordbuilder 16:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with the convention, as long as the more 'unique' names (without the university) are made redirects since there is some liklihood they'd be typed into the search box like that. AUTiger » talk 16:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm just thinking of how proprietary people are about their band.  I agree with autiger, the nonstandard names should have redirects.--Rocksanddirt 17:50, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Articles that are moved will automatically have redirects created. Creators of new articles should take the initiative in this department. —Wordbuilder 18:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Sounds like a great idea, I definitely support the idea --Littledrummrboy 18:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I recommend that the main article be the band's own given name. My recommendation is that Redirect articles would be the ones titled "proper name of institution marching band" which would then either be the complete article if none exists or redirect to the name by which the band calls itself. The convention would be "name band calls itself" is the "institution name marching band". A case could be made for marching bands which are part of the student association or ROTC and permitted to use the institution moniker, but are not "owned" or funded by the institution itself.  I do agree that the disambiguation page would be "common mascot marching band may refer to " X list of bands. Group29 20:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, and one I hadn't considered in co-signing above. Thoughts? --Littledrummrboy 18:22, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, that seems fine.  though we do want to include redirects as well.  and make sure they are on the universities main page/project pages as well.  --Rocksanddirt 16:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article naming conventions 

message: perhaps a category?  or maybe a short article discussing the existance of these types of organizations?  --Rocksanddirt 15:56, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely something that should be addressed somewhere; perhaps as an addition to the marching band article or as its own article. I support the category as well; I'll do some wiki-surfing in attempts to find articles which pertain to the category. --Littledrummrboy 18:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Community marching Bands 

message: Would anyone be against putting a category in the user box? That way we could quickly find each others talk pages if we needed help or whatnot.   05:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's a good idea. —Wordbuilder 16:09, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm not a userbox fan, but categories are good. AUTiger » talk 19:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Sounds good to me. --Littledrummrboy 01:06, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I gots no problems.--Rocksanddirt 04:02, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category for user box? 

message: Ok, so whilst looking at the Tennessee (sp) band's article I noticed they had a big section with fight song lyrics and such.  Other schools have the more notable songs as their own articles.  so, should the notable school/fight songs with their own articles be included in the project?  I would think so, as they are a big part of the marching band thing.  --Rocksanddirt 16:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The general rule for notability should apply: can you find reliable sources that allow you to support an article written about the subject? I doubt most fight songs actually qualify, although some digging through microfilm/fiche in libraries might uncover something on some fight songs. Also, including fight song lyrics in an article is generally a no-no as many would be under copyright. AUTiger » talk 03:41, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point on the copywrite stuff.  --Rocksanddirt 03:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would think that, as long as the articles exist, they should be included in the project. Thus far, I don't know of any that have been nominated for deletion based on non-notability or on copyright violation. Not saying it hasn't happened or won't happened; I just don't know of any. Never mind that; see the discussion here. Incidentally, I created the new article and changed the redirect on the "deleted" article without checking the history. It wasn't until now that I realized it was part of an AfD discussion. However, the new article was never nommed for deletion and there are huge amounts of other fight songs now. So, with over a year passing, the issue should either be left alone or, at least, be revisited. →Wordbuilder 04:43, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, include, but maybe we need to edit and update them (as we can)?  --Rocksanddirt 01:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, neighbor!  We recently encountered such issues at Wikipedia:WikiProject College football, and we decided to put a section on our front project page called "Articles & Pages being considered for deletion" -- it's helped some, that's for sure.  Maybe it can help you!--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:37, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the advice! →Wordbuilder (talk) 15:18, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Observation 

message: Rocksanddirt suggested that a link to a YouTube video of a marching band performing their fight song could be linked from the fight song article. I thought I would copy the discussion here. It looks the a proposal for a Wikipedia YouTube policy was discussed and rejected at Wikipedia:External links/YouTube. It would seem that a link to a video is OK as long as the linked material is not a copyright violation. However, some discussions I have seen dislike the linking of YouTube videos from Wikipedia. The issue has not been settled yet. In this particular case, there are videos at YouTube loaded by user "campcopake".  They are linked from the uclaband.com site, so I would guess that they are officially sanctioned. The shots appear to be taken from the Rose Bowl press box as official band video. Thoughts? Group29 21:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: well, if it's official video we might still need to see what the copywrite situation is. If the broader en-wiki community is not for it, that's fine.  --Rocksanddirt 21:12, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose it would be okay. However, if it's unsettled, I think it would be better to wait. →Wordbuilder 21:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I'll wait in general, unless I know the source is solid, and it really helps the article.  --Rocksanddirt 03:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: YouTube links

message: The template  needs a category added so all pages on which it is placed will be included on a list. This is common with other templates of this nature but missing from ours. What do y'all think? →Wordbuilder 14:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems fine to me.  --Rocksanddirt 15:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Category for template

message: There needs to be a section on the Project page where editors can post when associated articles are nominated for deletion. I just found out that there was a delection attempt on this (oddly by someone who has since left Wikipedia because the "community has become obsessed with... legalism to the point of absurdity.") Had I known about the proposed deletion—which didn't end up being upheld—I would have come to the defense of the article. →Wordbuilder (talk) 03:05, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea.  maybe a sub page to list them, and the location of the Afd discussion?  --Rocksanddirt (talk) 17:16, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We've put together CFB:DELETIONFAQ and have found it useful.  You are welcome to swipe it!--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion attempts

message: Anyone interested in possible policies (guidelines) about inclusion of fight songs on Wikipedia should review the discussion and offer your input at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Fight songs. AUTiger » talk 21:31, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure the question will come up again since that discussion pretty much came to a conclusion that no one is going to bother to enforce. Perhaps the next time it arises, it'll be just as much a waste of time as it was the first go around. →Wordbuilder (talk) 22:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fight song proposals 

message: From a discussion on merging The Victors article into the main University of Michigan article on the Talk:University of Michigan page:
As a song, The Victors is notable without even being placed into the category of Fight Songs. It was named in Wikipedia:Centralized_discussion/Fight_songs as an example of a notable fight song. The article itself has a ref from the New York Times. Template:Big Ten fight songs is one of many places that refer to the song and other Big Ten songs directly. The sports articles use a template similar to Template:NCAAFootballSchool where the fight song has its own link. The actual bar of notability in Wikipedia is not set that high should the question arise again. Group29 (talk) 22:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure the question will come up again since that discussion pretty much came to a conclusion that no one is going to bother to enforce. Perhaps the next time it arises, it'll be just as much a waste of time as it was the first go around. →Wordbuilder (talk) 22:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability of fight songs

message: Since Marching band is essentially the flagship article of this WikiProject, does anyone else think we should work to get it to Good article, at the least, or maybe even Featured article status? Right now, it's in a miserable state and is a sad reflection on this project. →Wordbuilder (talk) 16:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent idea. I implore all members of this WP to lend time to the cause. As we all know, it gets tricky, as each of us have a slightly different perspective, based on how/where we marched or have otherwise experienced marching band. I challenge all to keep the article informative, concise, and NPOV. Use the discussion page as well as this WP to discuss with us all as collaborators. Good call, Wordbuilder! Littledrummrboy (talk) 22:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Marching band]]

message: There is a discussion in progress regarding this template created by Fliry Vorru. →Wordbuilder (talk) 15:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion regarding new stub template

message: Howdy "neighbors across the street" !!  You may be interested to participate in a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of drum corps.  If there's anything we can do for you at Wikipedia:WikiProject College football just let us know!--Paul McDonald (talk) 21:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the heads up. I contributed to the discussion and added the AfD to our Deletion Notices page. →Wordbuilder (talk) 22:10, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  AFD Notification 

message: The College football Barnstar
		For all you do to support college football and for never getting anything more than light applause, I award to the entire Wikipedia:WikiProject Marching band the College football barnstar.  College football would not be the same without you.--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:35, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: A Barnstar for all project members

message: L. D. Bell High School (Hurst, Texas)'s marching band, the current Bands of America Grand National Champs, have been very successful for the past several years and beyond, but they don't have their own article. Is it appropriate to add the high school's article to 'Category:High school marching bands'? Also,I know notability is always a tough question, but are there any rough guidelines about what would make a high school marching band notable enough to have its own article? Thanks! --216.62.101.13 (talk) 19:34, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that it would not be appropriate to add the school's article to the band category. As far as notability goes, articles for most high school marching bands probably don't make the grade. However, ones that have won high-ranking awards are likely the exception. The rule of thumb is the amount of third-party coverage. If you can get good information from newspapers, magazines, and news websites, you're probably okay. If the only source is the school or a band organization, you're probably in trouble. →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:11, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the sanity check. I'm not sure why I was thinking of going by anything but the normal notability guidelines... I'm going to not create an article for the band. I think their notability too temporal and depends a lot on their current success.  Maybe a second or third BOA win would be a good opportunity to examine whether there is notability for the long-term such that would justify an article. Thanks again! --216.62.101.13 (talk) 20:19, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  L. D. Bell High School (Hurst, Texas) 

message: There are (at present count) 58 pages up for deleletion in AfD Discussions at the College Football Project.  Since your project is listed as a related project, your project members may wish to participate.  This large volume is really more than we can handle in such a short period of time and the project asks for your input.  Please review Articles & Pages being considered for deletion immediately.--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow! Someone is really going after football article. I'll take a look and hopefully others here will as well. →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:42, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We would truly appreciate all the help we can get on this one.  Hey, if it should be deleted, that's fine... but we just don't have the time or manpower to address the sheer volume we're facing!--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Large number of AfD's in progress

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 before December 2008, 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 16:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Folks, we better make it a priority to cleanup Marching band. It has a refimprove tag on it, which is not a good thing. →Wordbuilder (talk) 16:39, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Marching band 

message: Don't just focus on colleges. Nhdrumline11 (talk) 03:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  High school marching bands 

message: There is inconsistency in how article are rated on the importance scale. For instance, Cavalier Marching Band is rated high while Texas Tech University Goin' Band from Raiderland is rated mid. Both are Division I schools, so why the difference? (This is only one of many examples.) →Wordbuilder (talk) 20:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Importance ratings 

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 05:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinators' working group 

message: In the course of editing a band-related article, I wanted to let the reader know what the term caption meant, remembering my own confusion when I first ran across it (the obvious related question would be, "Can't we all say 'category'?", but I digress).
A quick search seems to show that there are currently about 300 WP articles that use the term in a band-related context, and none of the ones I glanced at explains what it is.  Typical would be an article about a high school that says their band "won more captions than any other band" -- I can't imagine this makes any sense to most of the article's readers.
I'm not sure if it would be appropriate to have it as a separate article, as that may veer toward dicdef (which is another lack -- Wiktionary currently does not list this particular meaning of caption).  But, perhaps there's an appropriate existing article that could have this as a section, which caption (marching band) or similar could then be a redirect to?  Said article or section could briefly describe which captions are common in competitions, and maybe even have an etymology/explanation of the term for weenies like me.--NapoliRoma (talk) 18:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Caption" 

message: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mechanicsburg HS Marching Band, feel free to comment. J04n(talk page) 14:04, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD notification 

message: I'm not sure whether this should be raised on this page or in the article's talk page (so I'll put it in both); but I don't think this article should be in this WikiProject.
A British-style brass band is not a "marching band", by the definition of that term in the Marching Band article. Brass bands do sometimes march ... but that doesn't make every (or indeed any) brass band a "marching band".
I mean no disrespect to marching bands or to the WikiProject - I just think this is an inappropriate categorisation, and likely to be confusing.
132.244.246.25 (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article - Brass band (British style) 

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) 03:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP 1.0 bot announcement 

message: Hello Wikiproject! Currently there is a discussion which will decide whether wikipedia will delete 49,000 articles about a living person without references, here:
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Since biographies of living people covers so many topics, many wikiproject topics will be effected.
The two opposing positions which have the most support is:  
# supports the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, User:Jehochman
# opposes the deletion of unreferenced articles about a living person, except in limited circumstances, User:Collect
Comments are welcome.  Keep in mind that by default, editor's comments are hidden. Simply press edit next to the section to add your comment. 
Please keep in mind that at this point, it seems that editors support deleting unreferenced BLP articles if they are not sourced, so your project may want to source these articles as soon as possible. See the next, message, which may help. 
===Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people===
;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 "[[WP:Incubation|incubation pages" 
If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles that your project covers, 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  05:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comment on Biographies of living people

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 "[[WP:Incubation|incubation pages" 
If you are interested in moving unreferenced blp articles that your project covers, 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  05:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Tools to help your project with unreferenced Biographies of living people

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 Marching band 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 23:18, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marching band articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release 

message: I didn't realize how much information there was on David Wallis Reeves and his The American Band until I started seriously searching today. Anyone want to join the fun? :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:09, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: D. W. Reeves and the American Band

message: Kappa Kappa Psi is a college band fraternity and is a current Good Article-class, High-importance article in this WikiProject. The article is being considered for Featured Article status. The current nomination is due to an exemption given by one of the FAC delegates; the first nomination closed with few comments and no consensus on whether or not the article had achieved Featured Article status. I am posting this to ask all contributors to the Marching Band project to consider reviewing the article. Thanks! Sycamore (talk) 19:47, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article candidate 

message: There is a discussion occuring here regarding which music articles should be deemed vital to the Wikipedia project. Your input would be appreciated. GabeMc (talk|contribs)  22:15, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vital articles 

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: The Tiger Pep Band at DePauw University article is currently being reworked by a new editor who is closely affiliated with the band. Some attention and assistance by subject-matter experts would probably be appreciated. I've left my own thoughts at User talk:DPU-TPB. Huon (talk) 21:14, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tiger Pep Band at DePauw University 

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: Hello,Please note that Choreography, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's 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, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement! 

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    07:47, 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    07:47, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background 

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 

message: I have nominated Kappa Kappa Psi for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 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" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:44, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR notice 

message: I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
*John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
* John Smith "" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from ,  and .
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
-  Headbomb {t · c · p · b}
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  User script to detect unreliable sources 

message: Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a  parameter to , which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to , and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass  a new  parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:12, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project-independent quality assessments 

message: Can someone please find an audio recording for the Semper Supra march? Preferably add English subtitles? Thanks. Faith15 16:35, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Audio Recording of Semper Supra 

message: On the pages where the bands have repertoires or programs, only the composers or performers are linked. What about the music itself? AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:03, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should music titles be linked?