Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Reference works
 | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Please assess
[edit]Please assess Fictitious entry. Thanks! 11:32, 3 October 2018
Requested move at Talk:Baike.com#Requested move 29 February 2024
[edit]
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Baike.com#Requested move 29 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 04:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Merger with WP:WikiProject Books
[edit]Considering this project is inactive and the scope entirely overlaps with the scope of WikiProject Books, I think it would make sense for a merger to be done to reduce the amount of inactive projects without losing any data. This can either be done as a task force (in which case pages would remain tagged for the project but just as a task force) or a complete merge, whichever people want. My motive for this is partially that many, many books that fall within the scope of WP Books are only tagged with this inactive project - and while I could tag all of them as this one as well, I feel this project's scope is needlessly duplicative. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's a shame because "Reference works" is a good grouping but there doesn't appear to be enough activity to warrant a task force. We could merge it, but I also think it's fine to leave it dormant/historical. czar 22:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Czar I disagree on leaving it dormant/historical because then it still shows up as an option for people to tag, instead of this project, which results in people tagging a project with 0 active editors instead of this active one. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think it can be said that it has zero active editors because I'm replying here. I also don't think it will become any more "active" for merging under Books. czar 03:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Czar You aren't listed as a member of this project and since I notified WP books I assume you came from there. Well it will at least get rid of the fact that people tag a project which has inactive everything, including inactivated banners and assessments and categories. Its scope is also duplicated - I can't think of a single thing that would be tagged here that doesn't fall under the "books" or "literature" projects. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:07, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- I think making it a task force in WP:BOOKS is probably the way to go, even if that just ends up being a de facto inactive task force. Right now we have no real way of knowing how many editors made it here, saw the "inactive" tag, and left without ever saying anything. If we turn it into a task force of BOOKS, we get to keep these articles all grouped together like they are now, and it'll also look less discouraging. -- asilvering (talk) 10:23, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Czar You aren't listed as a member of this project and since I notified WP books I assume you came from there. Well it will at least get rid of the fact that people tag a project which has inactive everything, including inactivated banners and assessments and categories. Its scope is also duplicated - I can't think of a single thing that would be tagged here that doesn't fall under the "books" or "literature" projects. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:07, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think it can be said that it has zero active editors because I'm replying here. I also don't think it will become any more "active" for merging under Books. czar 03:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Czar I disagree on leaving it dormant/historical because then it still shows up as an option for people to tag, instead of this project, which results in people tagging a project with 0 active editors instead of this active one. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ended up here randomly. I'd suggest just marking the projet as defunct and removing all the tags entirely, not even bother with a merge. Less is more - this is a needless duplication of WP:BOOKS. The last talk page discussion that got a response was back in 2016, and over a rather trivial matter of tagging. Anyone with a discussion matter to raise about reference works should raise it at BOOKS for a larger set of eyes. SnowFire (talk) 18:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)