Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Vermont

message: It was time for an article for the Vermont dairy industry. It is a very basic article at the moment. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you! Thriley (talk) 09:19, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Vermont dairy industry

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) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  User script to detect unreliable sources 

message: There is a content dispute at Talk:Abortion in Vermont that would benefit from greater editor involvement. 129.67.118.6 (talk) 12:53, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk:Abortion in Vermont discussion 

message: I wanted to suggest reconsidering the importance of the University of Vermont and Middlebury College articles. Looking at Wikipedia pageview statistics, these are some of the most viewed articles related to Vermont. I propose bumping them from High to Top. HeyTomek (talk) 22:31, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I made the bold edit on both. HeyTomek (talk) 04:17, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  UVM and Middlebury Articles: Importance 

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) 22:20, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project-independent quality assessments 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment#Proposal: Reclassification of Current & Future-Classes as time parameter, which is within the scope of this WikiProject.  This WikiProject received this message because it currently uses "Current" and/or "Future" class(es). There is a proposal to split these two article "classes" into a new parameter "time", in order to standardise article-rating across Wikipedia (per RfC), while also allowing simultaneous usage of quality criteria and time for interest projects. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:18, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion at [[Wikipedia:Content assessment]]