Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alberta/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Old copies of the Barrhead Leader that discuss Barrhead Composite High School?

Hi! Any ABwikipedians know where/how to access old copies of the Barrhead Leader that discuss Draft:Barrhead Composite High School? There should be articles about how it absorbed middle school levels in 1999

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 01:33, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Have you tried the Barrhead Public Library? Or reaching out to the Barrhead Leader directly? If you have an Edmonton Public Library membership there is a slim chance your library card access to historical newspapers may include this local paper. Hwy43 (talk) 01:57, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm an American citizen living in China, and I do not have an Edmonton Library membership. Individually my only option may be to contact the Leader directly WhisperToMe (talk) 02:43, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Ah. Given all your activity editing Alberta-related articles I assumed otherwise. What is it about Barrhead and Pembina Regional School Division that attracts an American editor living in China? I will see if EPL has digital records of past editions of the Barrhead Leader. Hwy43 (talk) 03:00, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

I like to edit school district articles across the US and Canada, so it's become something of a specialty! I did a series of articles on Iowa for the past year or so, particularly as it shows the decline of rural America. Anyhow I found that particular article as there was a draft up that had been declined and I felt that it should be going in the mainspace ASAP, as most other comprehensive high schools in the US and Canada already have articles anyway, so it's time for this one to get one too. Anyhow, thank you so much for your help! WhisperToMe (talk) 04:38, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Cool. I looked through my EPL account and no luck. It only has major dailies available. Hwy43 (talk) 15:56, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for checking! WhisperToMe (talk) 21:59, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

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) 04:23, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Municipal district edit warring against consensus

Hello all, we have an IP-hopping editor that is warring at numerous rural municipality (county-equivalent) articles and lists, particularly at List of municipal districts in Alberta and List of rural municipalities in Saskatchewan, renaming the municipalities contrary to the consensus here for Alberta and the extrapolated approach of that consensus here for Saskatchewan. The IP editor finally reached out to me on my talk page here. Following my response, the editor evidently didn't like it and reverted me yet again with this edit with a strange and unfounded accusation. Would interested members of this WikiProject please watchlist List of municipal districts in Alberta and List of rural municipalities in Saskatchewan? I'm about to revert again and apply a level three warning on the editor's talk page. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 05:28, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

List of Calgary Transit bus routes

List of Calgary Transit bus routes needs to be updated with secondary sources. The list currently relies on primary sources that are out of date. It recently survived Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Calgary Transit bus routes. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:13, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

FAR for Accurate News and Information Act

I have nominated Accurate News and Information Act 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. Z1720 (talk) 14:55, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

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 "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

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) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

GAR notice

Edmonton has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:06, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for John Edward Brownlee

John Edward Brownlee has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:43, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Content assessment

 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})} 21:14, 1 July 2023 (UTC)