Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Secret Societies

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the 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 that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. 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 21:02, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

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 22:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards 

message: Citizendium has some interesting discussions about their article on Secret societies.  See Secret societies, and Talk:Secret society, where they are discussing what should and should not be included there.  Cirt (talk) 14:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citizendium discussions 

message: If this WikiProject survives the deletion process, a Portal should be created to go along with the WikiProject.  Cirt (talk) 14:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portal 

message: I can understand why we are not looking at the Thelema and Rosicrucian alphabet soup of splinter groups, but why are religious secret societies excluded?  Examples such as the Donmeh‎, Alawites and Kakure Kirishitan‎ are definately secret societies with hidden teachings.  They are not primarily social, it's true, but they seem to be more secretive than the Oddfellows.  In non-Western societies, indeed in pre-Modern Europe, it would be very hard to find societies, secret or open, without a religious motivation.
16:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree... we should not limit ourselves to purely "social" groups. There are political secret societies, religious secret societies, criminal secret societies, and secret societies that don't fit into any sub category or into several.  That said, I recently change the wording of the scope to say that the criteria was "societal" as opposed to "social".  This change reflected a conversation between me and John Carter about this same issue.  The intent is to say that the group must be a "society" and not a government agency like the CIA or a corporate entity like IBM (which fit many of the definitions of being "secret" in that they do things behind closed doors and can even have a culture of secrecy...  but are not normally thought of as 'secret societies')Blueboar (talk) 17:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, also agreed, for the most part. As stated above, any religion being persecuted will show characteristics of a secret society, even if only under those circumstances. They wouldn't necessarily qualify on that basis. The Donmeh, while maybe in a way a religion, strikes me as being one which, in a sense, might be counted as being predictably "secret" within their social milieu, considering that they are seemingly pretty much exclusively found in Jewish and Islamic areas. Maybe the best way to subcat them would be as :Category:Covert religious movements. As they seem to be factually pretty much "secret" during their existence, common sense would qualify them. Alawism might be the same. I don't know Islam that well. Kakure Kirishitan refers specifically to a religious group whose sole period of existence was during persecution. In the case of that article, it isn't referring to the religion as a whole, but to a specific manifestation of that faith that existed only during persecution. On that basis, I don't think the "broader" exclusion should be applied there. And, for what it's worth, if there were a Church of Child Molestation in the United States, which included child sexual abuse as a sacrament, I would have no doubt that it could easily qualify as a secret society, as it's actions, while religious, extend beyond the religious sphere. In this instance, it clearly includes felonius conduct, and would qualify in the same way the Mafia does. That would be sufficient I think. What do the rest of you think of maybe creating a category like that "Covert religious movements"? John Carter (talk) 17:37, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What about something like Opus Dei?... it is certainly popularly thought of as a "secret society", and I strongly suspect that there are reliable sources out there that call it such (although I would have to look). But it is definitely religious in nature and not societal.  Assuming it does fit our definition ... how would you sub-categorize it? Blueboar (talk) 02:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, I think Opus Dei should go in the project.  It is popularly thought of as a secret society although it probably has fewer attributes of such than the Knights of Columbus.  As far as sub categorising it, I wouldn't really be able to answer.  I would be wary of categorising it as a Covert Religious Movement as it is quite open about almost everything.  The point about Opus Dei is the perception, not the fact.  There are no oaths or handshakes, and although there is a "codeword" (according to John Allen) it seems to be informal.  JASpencer (talk) 16:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly could be the case that we alter the banner to include "secret societies and organizations alleged to be secret societies", as several may not actually meet any real definitions, but just be called that by popular acclaim. the  already deals with that issue. Certainly, if there is disagreement, or worse, regarding whether a group qualifies, if they are in some way important to the history of secret societies, even if only because of the allegations, I think a reasonable case could be made for their inclusion. John Carter (talk) 22:22, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious Secret Societies 

message: Although some student societies (for example the Cambridge Apostles, the Skull and Bones and the The Machine) are quite important in the "secret societies" scheme of things, many of these are not.  Would it be possible to farm these out to fraternities and sororities? JASpencer (talk) 21:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it depends on their nature.  Some are have been called "secret societies"... some have not.  Some have standardized ritual initiation ceremonies (ie it is the same in all chapters) in many cases modeled after those used in Freemasonry... others don't.  In other words, we need to take it on a case by case basis. Blueboar (talk) 22:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Student Societies 

message: Just to add to the confusion... here are some dictionary definitions of the term:
*OED - An organization formed to promote some cause by secret methods; its members being sworn to observe secrecy.
*Mirriam-Webster - any of various oath-bound societies often devoted to brotherhood, moral discipline, and mutual assistance
*Cambridge - an organization which does not allow people who are not members to find out about its activities and customs. 
*MSN/Encarta - organization that keeps activities secret: an organization that requires its members to keep all or some of its activities secret from nonmembers.
*Random House - an organization, as a fraternal society, the members of which take secret initiation oaths, share secret passwords and rites, and are bound to assist each other.
*American Heritage - An organization, such as a lodge, that requires its members to conceal certain activities, such as its rites of initiation, from outsiders.
Again, we have a very wide range of definitions... and determining whether a given group qualifies as a secret society depends on which definition you pick... for example, Collegiate fraternities fit the definition given by Mirriam-Webster, Random House, and American Heritage... but not the OED, Cambridge or Encarta. (side note: could it be that the phrase means something slightly different to Americans than to Englishmen?)
So I come back to the question that I have been asking repeatedly, but not recieved an answer for... do ALL definitions have to apply? (in which case we probably have a very small group)... just one? (in which case we have a huge group)... Or some number that is more than one, but less than all? (in which case, how many)  We are never going to stop having POV pushers arguing for either inclusion or exclusion of their pet society unless we decide this fundamental issue and clearly spell it out. Blueboar (talk) 23:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "We are never going to stop having POV pushers arguing for either inclusion or exclusion of their pet society"---that doesn't sound like an assumption of good faith.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.247.3.210 (talk) 16:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really... or if it is a lack of good faith, it is at least an even handed lack of good faith directed at both extremes. Blueboar (talk) 21:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

text: How does a college fraternity fit the OED definition? How is a frat: "An organization formed to promote some cause by secret methods; its members being sworn to observe secrecy"?  What cause are they promoting by secret methods? Blueboar (talk) 14:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "...if you open any college yearbook before 1880, that's how they're listed..."  hmmm... this is a good point.  Back in the 1800s, the term "secret society" was indeed commonly used in the way that our anonimous poster says.  At that time, the term did not really have the sinister connotations that it does today.  But this raises another question.  Is the term still used the way it was in the late 1800s?  Has its meaning (as opposed to it's definition) shifted? Do fraternities call themselves "secret societies" in today's world?  Do other sources apply the term to fraternites in todays world? Blueboar (talk) 15:31, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, when it comes to including people in categories in Wikipedia, self-identification matters a great deal.  There are any number of arb-com decisions about this.  When there is controversy over whether a person or group of people belong in a category, the deciding factor is their self-identification with that category.  Granted, most of these cases dealt with individuals being placed within ethnic/national, or sexual preference categories, but the concept is the same.  When in doubt, self-identification is the tie breaker.  Note that this is different from what happens in articles.  Because NPOV tells us that we can and should include multiple opinions and views in our articles, we can and should state that: "Tappa Tappa Keg Fraternity is considered a secret society by Scholar X (cite to where X states this)" in the article on TTK... but the same does not apply to including TTK in the category "Secret Societies"... we can not include TTK in the category unless TTK self-identifies with the category.  The criteria for inclusion in Category and Project space is different than the criteria for inclusion in Article Space. Blueboar (talk) 17:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Definitions of the term 

message: Hi Wikiproject. I'm not a member, but I was looking around to see if I could find some information about which secret societies still exist today? Could someone make a category for it, or at least point me in the right direction? ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 20:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which ones still exist today? 

message: I've recently requested that ANAK Society, an article about Georgia Tech's secret society, be peer reviewed before I nominate it for FA status. The article was recently promoted to GA status, so it is already in pretty good shape. However, I was hoping someone from this community with knowledge of what a FA-quality secret society article should look like could offer his or her opinion. Thanks in advance. MaxVeers (talk) 14:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's a featured article now. Still looking for feedback from this community. MaxVeers (talk) 23:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that this is a fairly new Project... and that there is still considerable debate as to what constitutes a Secret Society in the first place (including whether or not colligiate societies and fraternities should fall under the scope of this project), I am reluctant to opine on what a FS-quality secret society article should look like.  Sorry. Blueboar (talk) 01:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looking for peer review of [[ANAK Society]] 

message: Secret combination, a page within the scope of this project is going to have to be moved to make room for a disambiguation page. What would an appropriate name for the new page be? The other page will be Secret Combination (song). It is a song by Kalomoira. Grk1011 (talk) 20:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would think "Secret combination (Mormonism)" or "Secret combination (Latter day Saints)" would be appropriate given the article topic. Blueboar (talk) 20:38, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving a page 

message: Ku Klux Klan has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 23:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR nomination 

message: I would like to ask anyone greek speaking that have contributed in this WikiProject to read the greek article el:Ελευθεροτεκτονισμός to give ideas and advices.--Iordanis777listening 10:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideas needed 

message: Is there an existing infobox for secret society articles? If not, what is usually used? --Geniac (talk) 16:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox? 

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) 20:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

message: Should Mystical 7 redirect to Mystical Seven (Missouri), Mystical Seven (Wesleyan) or Mystical Seven? Please see WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Which "will be significantly more commonly searched for and read than other meanings"? --Geniac (talk) 14:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This should only redirect to Mystical Seven (Wesleyan), since only Wesleyan considers this the proper form of its name. Mystical Seven (Missouri), does not. There is a revert editor here that has twice made a change without any discussion, any rationale, or any other defense. All he did was post to a different editor talk that her edit "did not appear to be constructive" which seems to be less than an assumption of good faith. Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith Observatio (talk) 14:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Well, it doesn't and that's a discussion for Talk:Coke, not here. None of the above arguments are convincing except that redirecting Mystical 7 to Mystical Seven will most easily assist readers find the article they want. --Geniac (talk) 13:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mystical 7 

message: Currently, 334 articles are assigned to this project, of which 128, or 38.3%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of .) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place the following template on your project page:
:{{}}
If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 17:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles flagged for cleanup 

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 23:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Secret Societies 

message: I stumbled on a mention of the Alibi Club when I was fleshing out another article; perhaps someone might be interested in doing an article on it, which according to this article, included George H. W. Bush among its 50 members in 1991, when he was president.  68.167.253.225 (talk) 08:44, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Acroterion (talk) 13:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alibi Club of Washington DC 

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 06:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinators' working group 

message: Hi, this article is currently near the top of the wp:featured articles/Cleanup listing as it is in 5 maintenace categories: Articles needing additional references (Dec 2008), Articles with unsourced statements (Jun 2008, Jul 2008, Aug 2008, Feb 2009). Anyone finding time to make improvements would be appreciated, thanks Tom B (talk) 15:36, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Knights of Columbus]] 

message: Just a heads up - Here's a new stub I've tagged with your project. APK lives in a very, very Mad World 16:32, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Another one is KKK Recruitment, which needs help with wikification and categories. I'm not knowledgeable in this area. Royalbroil 15:05, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Belizean Grove]] 

message: I didn't know this project existed until I came upon it looking at "What links here"; I created the Harugari article, which is on your "to be created" list, and also Sons of Hermann, which I don't see in your list but may also meet your criteria.  So you may want to tag those or modify them in some way. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:55, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[German Order of Harugari]]

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) 03:53, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP 1.0 bot announcement 

message: An Ip has added "the majority of which were of little historical significance" to the article. I don't see how it is possible to verify this woolly statement. Comments? Britmax (talk) 08:46, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Grand Wizard]]

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 Secret Societies 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 23:35, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secret Societies articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release 

message: The usage of  is up for discussion, see Talk:Hashshashin . 184.144.167.193 (talk) 05:11, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Assassins

message: Is this WikiProject still active at all?  If any of you guys are still around, here's a head's up on what needs doing ASAP: covering Asian secret societies. 
The tag saying the secret societies article "may not represent a worldwide view of the subject" is more than justified: the secret societies article SOLELY covers secret societies in the Western World and, excepting one off-hand example from Poland, only talks about secret societies in the Anglosphere. There is nothing on Chinese Hui_(secret_society) or Tongs, nor the prominent role secret societies have played in Imperial China's dynastic cycle (the White Lotus Society and then Red Turbans toppled the Yuan Dynasty, later the Heaven Earth Society fought against the Qing dynasty). None of this is mentioned. This is a serious problem of WP:Systemic_bias, English Wikipedia's tendency to center on Western culture at the expense of the history and contributions of Asia and the Global South. See WP:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias. 
You might be thinking, "if you see imbalance, WP:BEBOLD and rewrite the article to correct the issue," but I don't want to go it alone. If I could get some moral support, if not collaboration, that would be great...before I add move forward and completely overhaul this article or add Chinese secret societies to the WikiProject.  --NickDupree (talk) 20:39, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Severe Western world bias in this project and the [[Secret societies]] article itself 

message: The Knights of Columbus article was at one time a Featured Article, but was removed.  I've worked on it some more and renominated it, but it hasn't generated much attention or even any comments.  If you want to check out the article, and then it's nomination to either support it, or make suggestions to improve it, I would appreciate your time.  --Briancua (talk) 15:07, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Knights of Columbus FA candidacy 

message: The usage of  is under discussion, see talk: Sicilian Mafia -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 02:25, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: "{{noredirect|Mafia}}"

message: Hi all,
My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.
One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.
This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:
• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film
• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.
• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.
• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____
• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost
The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014
For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to: 
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 12:54, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leaflet for Wikiproject Secret Societies at Wikimania 2014 

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) 22:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment on the WikiProject X proposal 

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) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject X is live! 

message: I've started a new project page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Secret Societies/Library listing those works which are clearly currently in the PD which are included in the bibliography of the work listed. I may try to add similar lists from similar encyclopedic type works as I find them. Having said that, I currently have several others that I am actively preparing, or have the basic material to start pages for, so it might well be a while. John Carter (talk) 22:18, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Library page 

message: Hello all, I am pretty new to Wikipedia, but I'm very interested in fraternal orders and secret societies and am willing to help out however possible. Are there any suggestions for how I can get involved? Right now I'm busy working on the article on Ancient Mystic Order of Samaritans and a new one I created for Ladies of the Orient because these organizations are a pet interest of mine (full disclosure: I am a member of the former). I am also very interested in Independent Order of Odd Fellows, Freemasonry, Improved Order of Red Men and the complete spectrum of related organizations as well as magical fraternities such as the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn Greenzeiger (talk) 00:47, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Here

message: A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.
:– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A new newsletter directory is out! 

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 ANAK Society 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. Bumbubookworm (talk) 19:09, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR for ANAK Society 

message: I have nominated Knights Templar 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. Hog Farm  Talk 04:16, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR for Knights Templar