Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Notes and Queries

Since the goal is to seek completeness, would anyone be interested in tackling the contents of this venerable periodical (published since 1849) & verifying that Wikipedia has an article on every subject mentioned in it? While this might make Wikipedia even more England-centric, it might also provide some clues on notable topics none of us have considered -- & even lead to sources for various assertions that have remained unsourced. -- llywrch (talk) 05:29, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm interested, but have little time to spare. I started on N&Q some years ago, and got up to issue 15 ... I can't remember whether I managed to abstract much from it, though. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:54, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

That actually sounds like a huge project. There are clearly numerous scans up at archive.org. The first question I'd ask is "how complete is that set of scans?" Then the volumes seem to have an index, so the next issue would seem to be how to convert the index of an annual volume into a list of topics, so we could see what we're talking about. Experience with the DNB suggests that these two preliminaries are essential if the aim is actual completeness, not just stimulating some activity (which tends to be cherry-picking). Then I suppose I'd personally be attracted by listings, rather than individual antiquarian snippets: lists tend to look like reference material as soon as they get posted, while some biographical material can look like trivia. Charles Matthews (talk) 15:54, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

That's why I proposed it with the words "would anyone be interested". ;-) I'd consider tackling it myself -- I would find it fascinating to know what topics had been discussed or mentioned in the numbers between 1849 & 1922 -- but I have two huge projects of my own to contemplate: (1) trying to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Ethiopia, almost single-handedly (you can tell which articles I haven't written: those which are very good & those which are abysmally poor), & if I ever find a way to hand that off to someone else, then (2) comparing Pliny's Natural History to Wikipedia, checking that the cites from it are accurate & filling in any information I find there (I've owned a copy of the N.H. for a few decades now, & it would give me an excuse to read thru all ten volumes of the Loeb edition at least once). -- llywrch (talk) 06:49, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

It's actually a fair bet that much of the most interesting information from N&Q was incorporated into the DNB. That suggests to me that, in principle, working back from 1922 would be the right way to go. The DNB is in the public domain up to the 1912 version, and therefore a reasonable subproject might be to take about the last 15 years (e.g. around 1907 to 1922). The Tenth Series was going by then; having that series alone posted to Wikisource might be a reasonable project to get something moving. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:45, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Now see s:Portal:Notes and Queries, just beginning to collect up texts. Charles Matthews (talk) 08:42, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

User box

Is a Userbox for this project? I spend so much time here that I might as well add it to my user page. Thank you. Regards, RJH (talk) 15:52, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Yup! It is {{User WikiProject Missing}}. Cheers!Calaka (talk) 07:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I'd actually started to throw one together:

This user is a member of WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles.

But, good enough. Regards, RJH (talk) 15:37, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Specialist encyclopedias

I have recently gone over the annual lists of best reference works according to the American Library Association and Booklist. Between them, they average about 20 or 30 such works per year. Although it is far less than finished, many can be found at User:John Carter/Reference works. Several of these relate to specific topics which might not be specifically included in broader encyclopedias, but might still deserve inclusion here. Some, on the other hand, are very short entries which could easily be included in a main article. A few in the Encyclopedia of Tourism, for instance, discuss things like dinner tickets for cruise ships, for instance. In any event, would it be of any use to take these into account on this project? John Carter (talk) 17:03, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Guantanamo Bay detainees (heads up of new list).

I made up a list of Guantanamo bay detainees here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Guantanamo Bay Detainees and just notifying on talk page. I obtained the list from Wikileaks (see this for background: Guantanamo Bay files leak). Many of the articles already created and more still just need a redirect to common name. Cheers!Calaka (talk) 14:45, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Report of missing articles

I have created a report of articles that are in many Wikipedias, but not the English one. See Wikipedia:Dump reports/Missing articles. User<Svick>.Talk(); 14:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Hotlist N update

I've removed some blue links from Hot/N, where they seem to have been created as separate articles. The edit summaries should allow easy checking by those more familiar with this process than I am. I have no idea what SFNI is. --Trevj (talk) 10:34, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

SFNI stands for "section for non inclusion" which is basically what someone thought to be an item that does not warrant an article. They are left there for a second (third, fourth and so on) opinion in case someone else might think that they can be made in to an article. Good job on removing the blue links hehe. Kind regards. :) Calaka (talk) 11:08, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. --Trevj (talk) 11:11, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

User:Emijrp/All human knowledge

Hi all. In this project (and in the whole Wikipedia of course) there are people who love the idea about collecting all human knowledge. I have worked about this in a subpage. Suggestions, opinions and fixes are welcome. Please, discuss. emijrp (talk) 19:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

You could try putting ideas on this into an essay. Charles Matthews (talk) 10:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

The page is being improved a lot, but more work is needed! help please! : ) emijrp (talk) 12:47, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Thomas McKeown & his books

Greetings. In reviewing the status of what became known as 'the McKeown thesis', I checked Wikipedia for articles pertaining to the physician and medical historian Thomas McKeown. In doing so, I came across Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/List of notable books on history of medicine, in which I see some of McKeown's seminal books listed.

It is virtually impossible to study some areas, such as medical anthropology or medical sociology, without encountering and indeed being examined on awareness of, McKeown's works, which have generated a considerable body of literature in a range of fields pertaining to public health and controversies therein. In my view, the single most efficacious way to tackle the missing links pertaining to McKeown's works is to create an article on him, and subsume synopses of his seminal works and underpinning theses within relevant sections. This would both contain the effort pertaining to McKeown's works, and facilitate development of new and existing articles in a range of areas, from anthropology to sociology, to medical history and economics, to name the main areas which come to mind.

I personally am not in a position to start a McKeown article. If I come across an existing article in a relevant field, I should be able to, and would be prepared to, create a section within said article or articles, which can then be expanded to the point of justifying a separate article. But of course I don't have to be the one doing this. If anyone else is in a position to do so, good on them. Wotnow (talk) 15:22, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Articles missing from English Wikipedia that are on other language Wiki's

Just made a request for a bot tool to identify articles missing from the English wiki but exist on another language wiki for a category(I'm interested in Category:Turtles). I'm thinking maybe there are some existing tools or lists that are available among the members here? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 16:06, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

WP:FAOL has done this for featured articles from several languages. violet/riga _^[talk] 17:56, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Catching 'near misses' in lists of missing articles

As part of the Red Link Recovery wikiproject, a tool has been written that checks all the red links on a given wiki page and looks for similarly named existing articles. This might well flag up red-linked items within this projects lists for which articles already exist, only under a slightly different name. Perhaps best demonstrated with an example - feeding it the Most Missed Articles list suggests (among other things) that Disiz_La_Peste probably should be Disiz_la_Peste.

It might be worth running more of the missing lists through the tool to pick out similar suggestions. The tool can be found on the toolserver, here. - TB (talk) 23:14, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

That's a cool tool; thanks. It found 12 or so missing links on Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Movie Guide, for instance. Now added to the main page under a new Tools heading.--Tagishsimon (talk) 23:38, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Ta. - TB (talk) 08:00, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree, this is a great tool. I just tried it on the mammals and literary WP and managed to get 1 and 8 matches respectively. I will try it on a few other lists and update how I go. Thanks to the creator!Calaka (talk) 04:10, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

More on this. I've run the 249,731 red links on all sub-pages of Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles through a newer version of the system on it's most cautious setting and it has suggested alternate targets for 3,254 of them. I would expect 60%-70% of these suggestions to be 'correct', so this represents around 2000 items that could be eliminated. As soon as I figure out a sensible way to present the results I'll post them up. - TB (talk) 22:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Bleh - too late and too hard. I've dumped the whole list at User:Topbanana/Missing articles for now. - TB (talk) 22:17, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

IMDB

IMDB allows a lot of content to be downloaded as plain text. While there are far too many articles there ('U film' example) it might be worthwhile taking a sample from them. My recommendation would be to take all the films with a minimum of n votes - this would give some level of notability. violet/riga _^[talk] 18:00, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

IMDB isn't considered a reliable source for verification purposes, so I'm not sure that it could be used to establish notability in the Wikipedia sense. Regards, RJH (talk) 20:54, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Most needed missing encyclopedic articles

I don't suppose there is a job somewhere that correlates missing encyclopedic articles with the number of red link occurrences in article space? I.e. which of these missing articles are we most in need of creating? Thank you. Regards, RJH (talk) 17:57, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean something like this: [1]? Cheers!Calaka (talk) 14:20, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, the problem with WP:MWA is that it does not filter out red links from NavBoxes (despite the introductory wording). Hence it is a biased listing. What I meant is a list of the red links on this project that show up on the most Wikipedia articles. I.e. cross-correlating the missing articles with the most wanted articles. Regards, RJH (talk) 20:58, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie

There's a complete listing of the biographies from this PD work from the nineteenth century, which is posted in its entirety on the German Wikisource. The pages can be found in Category:Missing encyclopedic articles (Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie). I'll add more explanation on the pages there: this is hot off the press. Charles Matthews (talk) 21:49, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Other Wikipedias

Is there any chance anyone can update the lists of missing articles in other Wikipedias, and add more languages? I think those lists are very helpful in identifying important articles related to other countries that are missing on here. Iusethis (talk) 14:09, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

What language or languages are you interested in? Any particular topic area? I could do this task but am hesitate without obvious willingness of anyone to use data as even a small wiki would take hours to check(and possibly requires bot authorisation also). You can see a list Turtle articles in other languages but not on English Wikipedia I did recently. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 11:46, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm mostly interested in Swedish articles, no particular topic. Maybe other Scandinavian languages too. I think such lists can be very useful but I understand it may take a long time to generate them. Iusethis (talk) 12:45, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

There's very nice tool to suggest articles from other interwikis, which you can use to easily generate lists of missing articles in particular categories. Dsp13 (talk) 00:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Still active?

Is this Wikiproject still active? Some of the pages have lots of blue-links that havent been removed from the list. I want to join this WikiProject but first I want to know how much activity is going on over here.--Coin945 (talk) 13:36, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm active for a day or two every few months. I see a few others editing the lists also. - TB (talk) 14:53, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I do quite a lot on the Catholic Encylopedia (WP:CATH) although it's been quiet for a while. JASpencer (talk) 16:22, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. I know lately the "Wikipedian elite" have been scaring everyone away, so its only natural that lots of projects have tumbleweed flying passed them (:P). I'm still dedicated to pitching in, although I don't really want to touch the maintanence side of things (updating percentages etc.). I'll sign up now.

WP:WP DNB is active enough, though the discussion is mainly about "issues" rather than how much is getting done. It was a subproject here but clearly was going to need a forum of its own. Charles Matthews (talk) 21:49, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I do tiny bits of edits here and there (usually using the red link recovery to find articles and create redirects) and subsequently removing blue links from random pages. Gnomish work I know but it keeps me occupied. ;)Calaka (talk) 12:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

A Spanish dictionary from 1845...

...with biographies of women, in 3 volumes:

• Volume 1: http://books.google.es/books?id=zhxCuOr0gREC&pg=PR3&hl=es
• Volume 2: http://books.google.es/books?id=VBZt5xlN4L0C&printsec=frontcover&hl=es&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0
• Volume 3: http://books.google.es/books?id=ETgBAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=es&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0

Regards. emijrp (talk) 20:47, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Dictionary of New Zealand Biography

I've been doing some script-assisted work on the articles in Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/NZ/Dictionary of New Zealand Biography. I've done all the articles that I believe can be scripted. Could someone go through and remove the blue links? See also Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_New_Zealand#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Missing_encyclopedic_articles.2FNZ.2FDictionary_of_New_Zealand_Biography where I fine-tuned my script with subject experts. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:HighBeam

Wikipedia:HighBeam describes a limited opportunity for Wikipedia editors to have access to HighBeam Research.
—Wavelength (talk) 18:17, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Repopulated Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/List of notable albums

Hi. I've repopulated Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/List of notable albums with newly identified "notable albums" specifically in the jazz category from the "core collection" lists of The Penguin Guide to Jazz. I've got a couple of questions about how to best handle this. The list is formatted as a table because it includes information that will be of benefit to people starting articles - including and especially links to the source that helps verify their notability. I don't know how to automatically number tables, though, so that the numbers will be adjusted as items are removed. Does anybody else know? Is there some other good way to include article counts? Without those, generating percent completed will be difficult.

And speaking of which, in terms of determining percent complete, should that be tabulated by adding these to the beginning number of articles that were on the list? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:48, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately there doesn't seem to automatically number the rows in a table. It would be nice if there were a macro-command or variable that would return the row number, but I couldn't find anything like that. The nearest thing we have are the <ref> tags, which perhaps you could exploit in some manner. (Maybe give it a group name of "row", for example.) Nice work on the table. Regards, RJH (talk) 03:01, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Credit for that goes to User:Gyrofrog, who put it together. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:26, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

WP: MeSH

The link in the lists table that alleges to be to "Medical Subject Headings" (MeSH) instead links to WikiProject U.S. Roads/Maine (ME State Highways?). Would someone care to locate where this is supposed to go to and fix it? Dybeck (talk) 11:58, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

The list of mesh codes is located at List of MeSH codes, however it is not really a list of missing articles. --WS (talk) 08:21, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

List of several thousand reviews of encyclopedia and other reference sources available on e-mail request

Personally, I love the idea of this project, and would very much like to see it become much more active. One of the ways to help wikipedia as a whole find which encyclopedic articles it is missing is by finding the encyclopedias that are already out there, and then what content they have. I acknowledge up front that there are a hugh number of specialist encyclopedias, probably somewhere in the multiple thousands. But, considering we ourselves have several thousand WikiProjects to deal with various kinds of material, that really isn't that many per topic - probably, in general, maybe a dozen or two per individual WikiProject.

In fact, I have gathered together a list of all the book reviews I could find on JSTOR which seem to be specifically reviews of books called encyclopedias, dictionaries, or similar terms. And, yes, there are a few thousand such reviews. I am starting, slowly admittedly, on putting together a central list for philosophy/religion projects, at User:John Carter/Religion reference, but would very much welcome any help in assembling similar lists which could be given to individual WikiProjects. If anyone had any interest in doing so, they should feel free to drop me an e-mail and I can send them the full list of citations and reviews I got from JSTOR. I acknowledge up front that some specialist topics, like maybe woodworking, are not very much covered in academic reference journals, but rather trade/technical journals. I will try to get to them later. But, I do believe that it would be very useful to all of us if we had a clearer idea of what other reference sources do and do not include on given topics, and maybe what they say about them. John Carter (talk) 16:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Bibliography of encyclopedias

The above page, and its subpages, have recently been created. Personally, it seems to me that these pages would provide an excellent starting point for any individuals interested in finding what "missing encyclopedic articles" might be out there, as, I think pretty much by definition, any subject which has a substantive article in an encyclopedia is an "encyclopedic article," so any substantive articles which do not have, under some name, relevant content to them here might be counted as "missing" here. I myself think the goal of this particular WikiProject is one of the most important ones here, and I think that developing this page, and its related pages, would be an excellent first step in determining what missing encyclopedic articles exist on various subjects. On that basis, I very much encourage the members of this project to help develop it, and, possibly, ultimately, at their approval of course, maybe subpages of "missing articles" related to their subjects for the various other WikiProjects out there. John Carter (talk) 15:46, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Missing articles by language

I've popped up a new tool on the toolserver to list articles in a given Wikipedia that contain many interlanguage links, but that do not link to the English-language Wikipedia. This is very similar to the pre-prepared de, es and fr reports used here. If it's useful, it can be expanded to cover more languages or display a more selective set of results. - TB (talk) 20:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

This looks like a really useful tool. I hope you will continue to improve it and expand the number of languages etc. I would definitely like more languages included, especially Swedish. Also, would it be possible to choose any number of iw-links, not just 3,5,10,20?

I would like an option to remove all the iw-links from the result list and just show the number of links. Also options to view more results at the same page and sort them not only alphabetically but also by the highest number of links. The User 567 (talk) 14:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Will fiddle with this some more over the next few days. Watch this space. - TB (talk) 08:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks TB. I used your tool to search the sv wiki and didn't really solve much (just Orangutan interwikis), but it did prompt me to create a new article: Pelle Svanslös. A very famous character in Sweden (and Finland) but probably only borderline notable for en wiki. --Mais oui! (talk) 13:11, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

It fails for the Dutch wiki with the error: "Connect failed: Unknown database 'duwiki_p'". Probably because it uses du instead of nl? --WS (talk) 13:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Dutch fixed, along with a few others. All Wikipedia with more than 100000 articles can now be searched. - TB (talk) 13:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I've gone and added this tool to the project page - TB (talk) 22:51, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Index of Malawi-related articles

Index of Malawi-related articles has been nominated for deletion. I appreciate the continent of Africa is underrepresented on Wikipedia and am wondering whether someone active in this project can suggest a better location for the hundreds of redlinks currently in the list. Sionk (talk) 14:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps it can be moved here Wikipedia:List of missing Africa topics temporarily or a subheading can be placed on that page under Mali.Calaka (talk) 11:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Could the list be moved to Wikipedia:List of missing Malawi topics (removing the bluelinks in the process) and be brought under the ambit of a project? The number of redlinks is vast - it's clearly not appropriate as a normal list article. Sionk (talk) 18:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Errors in template

Template:Project missing articles currently lists "0%" completion for Encyclopedia Biblica. However, [Wikipedia:Encyclopaedia Biblica topics]] currently claims around 60% completion. I was going to just fix the template myself, but not being a member of this project and not really being sure (and given that "60%" is an estimate) I decided to post here first. What gives? elvenscout742 (talk) 06:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Question about possible specific lists for individual WikiProjects

Like I said above, I've started lists of articles, including both those that do and don't exist here yet, for several WikiProjects, generally those which are religion related, but at least a few others. I think it might be a good idea to get more of these pages, and to if possible link them through some sort of categorization. What sort of category name do any other editors here think would be the best name for pages of that sort? John Carter (talk) 16:25, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

VisualEditor is coming

The WP:VisualEditor is designed to let people edit without needing to learn wikitext syntax. The articles will look (nearly) the same in the new edit "window" as when you read them (aka WYSIWYG), and changes will show up as you type them, very much like writing a document in a modern word processor. The devs currently expect to deploy the VisualEditor as the new site-wide default editing system in early July 2013.

About 2,000 editors have tried out this early test version so far, and feedback overall has been positive. Right now, the VisualEditor is available only to registered users who opt-in, and it's a bit slow and limited in features. You can do all the basic things like writing or changing sentences, creating or changing section headings, and editing simple bulleted lists. It currently can't either add or remove templates (like fact tags), ref tags, images, categories, or tables (and it will not be turned on for new users until common reference styles and citation templates are supported). These more complex features are being worked on, and the code will be updated as things are worked out. Also, right now you can only use it for articles and user pages. When it's deployed in July, the old editor will still be available and, in fact, the old edit window will be the only option for talk pages (I believe that WP:Notifications (aka Echo) is ultimately supposed to deal with talk pages).

The developers are asking editors like you to join the alpha testing for the VisualEditor. Please go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing and tick the box at the end of the page, where it says "Enable VisualEditor (only in the main namespace and the User namespace)". Save the preferences, and then try fixing a few typos or copyediting a few articles by using the new "Edit" tab instead of the section [Edit] buttons or the old editing window (which will still be present and still work for you, but which will be renamed "Edit source"). Fix a typo or make some changes, and then click the 'save and review' button (at the top of the page). See what works and what doesn't. We really need people who will try this out on 10 or 15 pages and then leave a note Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback about their experiences, especially if something mission-critical isn't working and doesn't seem to be on anyone's radar.

Also, if any of you are involved in template maintenance or documentation about how to edit pages, the VisualEditor will require some extra attention. The devs want to incorporate things like citation templates directly into the editor, which means that they need to know what information goes in which fields. Obviously, the screenshots and instructions for basic editing will need to be completely updated. The old edit window is not going away, so help pages will likely need to cover both the old and the new.

If you have questions and can't find a better place to ask them, then please feel free to leave a message on my user talk page, and perhaps together we'll be able to figure it out. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:12, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Correction: Talk pages are being replaced by mw:Flow, not by Notifications/Echo. This may happen even sooner than the VisualEditor. WhatamIdoing (talk) 14:40, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Encylopedia of the Enlightenment

This is another encyclopedia, published in the same way as the ODNB (print edition, updated online edition behind a paywall). I've written a 'unified' way to add references and cite it, but I need feedback before I actually put this into 'live' articles. I'm not a WP coding expert, and I don't want to break anything.

Please take a look at User:Revent/UID/ISBNs/Oxford_Reference/EncycOfEnlight, and let me know what you think.

I've actually been 'indexing' and grabbing general reference lists out of the 'paid' articles on the Oxford Reference site, mainly to create a 'bibliography' of the DNB/ODNB articles that are stubs for reference when they are expanded. This would let editors who can't see the actual paid content still use the source list. This is intended as part of that effort. I want to do the same kind of thing for other content like this, and for the 'commonly used' sources that these encyclopedias repeatedly cite.

While checking for actual use of the ISBNs in citations shows essentially nothing, a search for the phrase "Encyclopedia of the Enlightenment" returns over 7,000 hits.

Thanks. Revent (talk) 22:19, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

a useful userpage

Here - User:Praemonitus/Who's Who - "a list of women selected from the 1914 Woman's Who's Who of America that did not have an article as of May, 2013, but who, through Google searches, showed evidence of being able to satisfy the Wikipedia notability criteria". DS (talk) 15:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Come and join The Wikipedia Library

The Wikipedia Library is an open research hub, a place for organizing our amazing community of research and reference experts to collaborate and help improve the encyclopedia.

We are working together towards 5 big goals:

Connect editors with their local library and freely accessible resources

Partner to provide free access to paywalled publications, databases, universities, and libraries

Build relationships among our community of editors, libraries, and librarians

Facilitate research for Wikipedians, helping editors to find and use sources

Promote broader open access in publishing and research

Sign up to receive announcements and news about resource donations and partnerships: Sign up
Come and create your profile, and see how we can leverage your talent, expertise, and dedication: Join in

Introduce yourself  :-)

-Hope to see you there, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 14:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

My missing topics pages

I have updated the Missing topics pages (except for Chemistry that, for some reason, refuses to update; attempts end with error messages and timeouts) - Skysmith (talk) 10:30, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Great stuff! It's been a while since I've worked in missing articles, but this might prompt a return. Moswento ^talky 08:54, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

New tool

Hi, I wrote a new tool that seems relevant to this endeavor here :-) Basically, it allows for easier, more fine-grained matching of third-party articles to Wikidata items (and thereby, Wikipedia articles). I'll be happy to add more catalogs if there's something you'd like. --Magnus Manske (talk) 08:47, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Encyclopaedia Britannica

I have created a new subproject called Wikipedia:WikiProject Encyclopaedia Britannica to give people editing in that area a focus point (all of course welcome). -- PBS (talk) 13:13, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Thompson-Reuters most cited scientists

Per the discussion at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions#“The Distorted Mirror of Wikipedia: a Quantitative Analysis of Wikipedia Coverage of Academics”, I have created a page for Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Thompson-Reuters most cited scientists, but it is very short at the moment, listing only 34 of the 6,000+ names identified by Thompson-Reuters. I plan to expand it further, but if anyone else wants to do so, please do. bd2412 T 23:39, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Nice idea. Obviously that 6000 articles will require years to be created, but we are doing ok with creating lists of missing topics. --emijrp (talk) 16:07, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I would hope that this list would be a priority, given the negative attention directed to the lack of coverage of its members. bd2412 T 04:05, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Museo del Prado encyclopedia

Here is a list of painters and other artists (many Spanish ones). It is an encyclopedia of Museo del Prado. It is not free, but the index is useful to discover missing articles. emijrp (talk) 16:17, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to User Study

Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 22:41, 13 January 2014 (UTC).

Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Movies/M-Q

Hello friends I recently found that the films under the list Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Movies/M-Q are already there on Wikipedia .So I created redirects and removed those names from the list. Sorry if I have done anything wrong,but I have seen that most entries on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Missing_encyclopedic_articles/Movies ,Wikipedia:WikiProject_Missing_encyclopedic_articles/Actors have their articles yet their names haven't been removed.I want to be an active contributor to this project .I think I can do a lot of work for this project .Skr15081997 (talk) 12:55, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Selection from Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/ADB

Is there an easy way to do a short sublist from the above based what can be also be found at ADB+Schweiz (2724)? -- 签名 _sig at 19:32, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to Participate in a User Study - Final Reminder

Would you be interested in participating in a user study of a new tool to support editor involvement in WikiProjects? We are a team at the University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within WikiProjects, and we are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visual exploration tool for Wikipedia. Given your interest in this Wikiproject, we would welcome your participation in our study. To participate, you will be given access to our new visualization tool and will interact with us via Google Hangout so that we can solicit your thoughts about the tool. To use Google Hangout, you will need a laptop/desktop, a web camera, and a speaker for video communication during the study. We will provide you with an Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 16:40, 5 March 2014 (UTC).

Missing directors

I recently submitted a few redirects from IMDB's Directors of 50+ movies to WP:AFC on behalf of the wikiproject. The majority were created but some were rejected (even after I added sources).

• Kodanda Rami Reddy A. to A. Kodandarami Reddy
• Rao C. S. R. to C. S. Rao
• F. H. Constantino to Fely Constantino

72.74.206.229 (talk) 13:40, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

 Done All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 02:59, 10 April 2014 (UTC).

Missing palaeontology articles

I've compiled a list[2] of pages that contains red links to genus names that should all be articles. I'll copy it here:

• Pages with many red links, that need to be made into articles: Taxa: Sparassodonta, Condylarthra, Equidae, Tapiroidea, Rhinocerotidae, Brontotheriidae, Suidae, Proboscidea, Cervidae, Antilocapridae, Anthracotheriidae, Hyaenidae, Amynodontidae, Oxyaenidae, Felidae, Hyaenodontidae, Odobenidae, Phocidae, Glyptodontidae, Pampatheriidae, Proterotheriidae, Macraucheniidae, Toxodontidae, Isotemnidae, Notohippidae, Leptictida, Cimolesta, Hyracoidea. Lists: List of therapsids, List of prehistoric mammals, List of extinct cetaceans, List of fossil primates, List of fossil birds, List of prehistoric bony fish, List of prehistoric cartilaginous fish, List of prehistoric jawless fish, List of placoderms, List of acanthodians, List of Ediacaran genera, and a horde of invertebrate lists can be found here: [3]

As is evident, that is quite a lot. Without a bot, or an intensive user effort, it will never be completed. FunkMonk (talk) 03:40, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

There are 5138 redlinks, by memory, full list here Feel free to copy it on-wiki. All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 04:55, 13 April 2014 (UTC).

Rich I will copy the missing paleontology articles list. Should I create User:Rich_Farmbrough/wanted/paleontology or just create it under this project. What do you say?--Skr15081997 (talk) 05:14, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Under this project is probably best. All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 13:12, 13 April 2014 (UTC).

Missing saints

I have created a list of missing saints at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Rich_Farmbrough/wanted/saints .

Of course many of these will be redirects, but please feel free to copy the list to English Wikipedia somewhere User:Rich Farmbrough/wanted/saints if you wish.

I cannot do this myself because it is currently being debated whether this is allowed under restrictions forbidding me from doing anything but "typing in the box". All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 04:03, 13 April 2014 (UTC).

 Done I have created it under your userspace.--Skr15081997 (talk) 05:28, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks! All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 13:12, 13 April 2014 (UTC).

Leaflet For Missing Encyclopedic Articles At Wikimania 2014

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

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 09:51, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

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) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Are tables of contents/indexes copyrighted?

Can we digitize tables of contents / indexes from copyrighted encyclopedias and such? For example, if I have a list of topics from a mondern encyclopedia, can I share it with this project? (If anyone replies here, please WP:ECHO me - thanks). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:34, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

@Piotrus: I'd suggest contacting the copyright-holder to make sure. Also see: http://www.lawqa.com/qa/are-table-of-contents-of-textbook-protected-by-copyright. It would probably be better to post your question at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --Fixuture (talk) 20:29, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

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) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Copyright Violation Detection - EranBot Project

A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Wikipedia. Come check it out at the EranBot reporting page. This bot utilizes the Turnitin software (ithenticate), unlike User:CorenSearchBot that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the EranBot reporting page and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest.--Lucas559 (talk) 22:29, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

WP:Intertranswiki

Hi, I recently kick started this project. I think we could do the same with this one, but many of the missing articles we're targeting at Intertranswiki are beyond ones to be translated. I've started a stub focus every month with 10 articles to start for a given topic. We could also feature old encyclopedia ones from here to be started too to generate interest. If there is support, in fact, I can see a lot of reasons why merging the two wiki projects into one to provide better coordination with overall missing content might be a positive one, although I have expressed my feelings on the matter at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Intertranswiki#Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles. Although I do think it would be nice to have a highly organized directory of 50 million missing articles I think we have to be practical and look at what can really be achieved in the short term.There's not much point in creating vast banks of red links if nobody is really going to blue linked them in short term. Generally I think it's more productive to take small chunks of a topic and put 10 up on a board for people to tackle without the task seeming too big and putting people off it. So if I could also encourage members here to get involved with the transwiki project and we could select some of the older ones to be started regularly in with other transwiki stuff in one we might get more results. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Thoughts User:John Carter, User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao and User:ThaddeusB?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:34, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I think merging both projects is a good idea. Both have the same goal, Intertranswiki works in the specific region of creating articles from other Wikipedias.--Skr15081997 (talk) 02:41, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

The problem is I don't want people to be expected to have to plough through any big lists and regular contribute. I do think the Intertranswiki project supporting this one with content at times though would be a good thing.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:35, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

This project has many lists of missing articles. An example is Wikipedia:Find a Grave famous people subproject. Many foreign languages WPs have articles that are missing from the English one. I understand that this project is much wider in scope but, just like you I also do realise that together these two projects can do a lot.--Skr15081997 (talk) 09:15, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

I can see the merits of merging the one project with the other; I'm sure the two will be working in complementary fashion on many occasions - merging them might make it easier to describe and create one broader set of goals. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 13:21, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

I think merging the two projects is a great idea Blofeld. Maybe one of the articles in this list will be the 5 millionth! Be bold and do it. :) Calaka (talk) 03:53, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Maybe a more pragmatic solution would simply be to include a number of the red links from the lists available here in the future focus assignments of Intertranswiki.--Ipigott (talk) 09:56, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

If anyone wanted to do so, there are a rather largish number of pages at Category:WikiProject prospectuses and Category:WikiProject lists of encyclopedic articles (the pages in the latter should be moved to the former category, but I haven't gotten to that in all cases yet), which I think could at least have the articles of real length (2 pages or more) made a priority of some projects. Exactly how to do that would be in some cases problematic though, because they might exist under other titles or be the bulk of some extant article on a closely related but different subject. But, in general, I would support a project merger of both of the projects mentioned above, and if this discussion is sufficient for those purposes, I would support it. John Carter (talk) 14:42, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Discussion of interest

Please see here: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#How_to_populate_some_requested_articles_lists. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:44, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

US TV stations, genome glossary and mammals added back from retirement!

I added the 3 lists back to the list. US TV stations and genome glossary I want someone to double check because the last person who edited the page is now a blocked and banned user so not sure why the redlinks remaining are still there (he also did some redirects to tv stations which I am not sure if appropriate). Mammals I looked through the original list and there are still mammal species to be added to Wikipedia (there are probably more than the few that I found but this would do for now). Kind regards. Calaka (talk) 04:28, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Mad Max list change

I find the seperation of lists created by Mad Max into a distinct page to be thoughtless and unhelpful. Previously we could see all of the list-subject headings on a single page. Now they are split onto two pages. Users of this page have to visit a second page to see the lists, even presuming they're attracted by the single link (Mad Max lists), which I tend to doubt. So. Wholly counterproductive. Could we have a revert, please. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:28, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Apologies that you think that. I felt all the subpages on the main page to be getting a bit cluttered and hence why I decided to consolidate them all into one subpage. They can easily be added back if you wish. Go for it.Calaka (talk) 23:13, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject requests at WP:AFC

Hello. I went through a few missing topics lists last month and found a number of requests that either existed under different titles or were sufficiently covered in main articles. Under this criteria, I submitted them to WP:AFC. While most of them were approved, a few were rejected for various reasons.

• Film company > Film production

I was first going to suggest it be redirected to film studio, however, Category:Film company stubs states "This category is for stub articles relating to companies involved in film production, distribution, or promotion (not film studios)."

• Colony of Cook Islands > History of the Cook Islands#Islands become British

Gives a brief overview of Cook Islands as a British colony.

• Conestoga Horse > Conestoga wagon

I submitted the redirect under the "alternate capitalization" criteria listed at the AFC creation wizard. The link was changed to a lower case "horse" and declined since the link already existed. A Google book search shows the capitalized title is used in multiple books and encyclopedias.

72.74.202.100 (talk) 11:38, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I made a redirect for the last one, as for the Reginald Drax, not sure if Draz and Drax are equivalent/alternative spellings? Didn't see anything in the article. For the first 2 I am not sure, I will leave for others to double check. If you see any other articles on this project that can be redirects, feel free to suggest them here, or to me, and we will be happy to consider them. You may of course create redirects yourself but if you are not sure how to, then you can ask us to help you. Kind regards,Calaka (talk) 01:01, 16 July 2016 (UTC)