Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias

For an archive of some of the discussion that led to this project, see Wikipedia:CROSSBOW. -- Jmabel 20:44, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)

---

File:Crossbow diagram.png

current state of image

Image:Crossbow_diagram.png: I don't really care about the outdated name of this, but the image itself needs to be altered to remove the word "CROSSBOW" (in "Area targetted by CROSSBOW": should just be "Area targetted"). Can someone take this on? I'd really like to see this already dealt with before we publicly announce this as a WikiProject. -- Jmabel 23:21, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)

I hope this isn't a controversial idea, but can we just abandon the image -- I just don't like the whole idea of a "weapon" "targetting" certain deficient areas as a metaphor for improving Wikipedia. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 00:15, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I agree though could there be another image somewhere to break the text up? That's perhaps a more controversial idea than getting rid of this one... -- Graham ☺ | Talk 00:20, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, feel free to do whatever. The same Venn diagram minus the military metaphor would be fine by me, but so would all sorts of things. And if someone can identify some appropriate existing images to add, please go for it. -- Jmabel 00:50, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

"would normally be longer"

I've taken the liberty of deleting from the list of the concerns of this project the phrase "Subjects which would normally be longer in other encyclopaedias." It's awfully vague, and I don't think it's useful. I've added one remark, reminding people that there already is a Wikipedia:Requests for expansion. -- Jmabel 00:02, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

Comments eagerly solicited

I've done about what I can to set this up as a project. My inclination is to give about 48 hours for comments and revisions by the other people who have been actively involved in this, then announce it on the Village Pump, link it into the list of WikiProjects, maybe even add it to the template on maintenance tasks (what do people think of this last possibility)?

Anyway, I've put most of today into putting this together. It's time for someone else to weigh in. -- Jmabel 00:48, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

"Third World"

Can I just point out that the term "Third World" is very US/Euro-centric and is frowned upon by globalist organisations/academics. Alternatives include "The South", "Majority World" and "Developing World"; can we agree on standard alternative to use, please? -- Graham ☺ | Talk 00:51, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"Developing world" is a good alternative. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 03:03, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

Fine by me. -- Jmabel 05:58, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

When is a to-do article done enough?

Thrilled to see this as an official project. Kudos to the organizers!!

I'm working, bit by bit, to improve Smith College. It is by no means done, but I'm pleased to report it is no longer a stub with an unannotated list of alumnae.  :) What I'm wondering is, how will we decide when it's good enough to come off of our to-do list here? And how should I indicate that when/if we do?

I will probably dig into Spelman College next if nobody beats me to it. —Bsktcase 02:32, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I think we need some way to monitor what we are doing, e.g. stub to article, stub created, featured article status. :ChrisG 04:11, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm hoping the comments area next to each article on the project page will help with this. We'll probably want to "rotate" what gets put on the shorter to-do list. If someone wants to suggest some "canonical" statuses for the comments section (as I did for Wikipedia:translation) that would be great. -- Jmabel 05:55, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

Structures

What about creating a template like the COTW template, but that specifically tags an article as being under active development by this wikiproject? -- Solitude 07:06, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

I think that is a great idea as it also would serve to bring contributors to the project. In fact something similiar got created in response to this this village pump discussion. Currently Template:Importantstub is up for deletion. So I think we ought to save it from deletion and amend so it refers to this wikiproject. Its not quite what you are talking about, but perhaps we need a stub template and work in progress template :ChrisG 07:28, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Location of the to-do list

I feel it is important the todo list is the first thing someone sees when browsing the project page; so that potential contributors are can see at one glance that it is an active project and well worth involving themselves with. Usability research on the internet shows very clearly that most people do not scroll down a page, unless their first view of a page grabs their attention. I think the to-do list should be treated as an advertisment as well as active tool. The current location of the to-do list (below the table of contents) means it is out of sight and so out of mind. ChrisG 07:08, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)