|This talk page is for discussing the core work of the WikiProject, ie. our drive to improve the quality of our key Scotland-related articles, focussing on Wikipedia 1.0 and beyond.|
|This is a WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
|This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Scotland and anything related to its purposes and tasks.
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13|
|WikiProject Scotland||(Rated Project-class)|
|Points of interest related to Scotland on Wikipedia:|
Outline – History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment – To-do
Looking to speak to UK based Wikipedia editorsEdit
My name is Victoria and I work at the cross-party UK think-tank Demos. We bring the voices of the public into policymaking, and a big focus for us is bringing those voices into political debates about the future of online life.
Right now, we’re listening to people who earn low or no pay from their online work, to understand what they think a fair and desirable future would look like when it comes to being paid for this work.
We are looking at this because new technology could make it easier for people to monetise their work online, instead of relying on existing ways of being paid such as advertisers, subscribers, and through traditional platforms. We are keen to hear perspectives both from people who would like to monetise their online work and from those who would not find such an option desirable, for example, those who volunteer their time online, view their content creation as a hobby or feel getting paid would negatively change the nature of the work they do.
I’m posting here to see if there are any wiki editors that would be interested in taking part in this project. We believe perspectives like yours should be included in decisions about how people are paid for their work online. The outputs of this project will be social media content, a short report and a site that highlights the views that come out of the workshops. Through these we will try to shape the debates held by politicians, the media and tech companies about how online payment for work is run.
It would involve joining a 1.5 hour Zoom workshop with others who do work online across various platforms, where we’d discuss as a group people’s experiences and how the systems for being paid for online work could be improved.
You would be paid £125 for your time and we would try to organise the call at a time that is convenient for all. At present the workshop is scheduled to run in the week beginning 9 May but there is some flexibility here to move the call forward if that week proves difficult for people.
This project is funded by Grant for the Web (you can read their announcement about the project here), a fund to boost open, fair, and inclusive standards and innovation in web monetisation. Demos itself is an independent, cross-party charity and has control over how the project is run.
Thank you for taking the time to read through this. If you are interested in taking part or would like to learn more, please contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org and I can provide further information. Vbdemos (talk) 12:28, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- There are replies at Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board#Looking to speak to UK based wikipedia editors, a similar post. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Scotland opentaskEdit
Requested move at Talk:Craigie, Perth and Kinross#Requested move 23 March 2022Edit
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Craigie, Perth and Kinross#Requested move 23 March 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 07:01, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
Lowland Scots peopleEdit
A sizeable Lowland Scots people article has appeared today. It's copiously referenced but my initial impression is that, at least to some extent, it may be advancing original research or synthesising sources to advance a thesis not fully supported by them. Also, if what it says is of significance, it would surely already be covered in this project by now? Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:28, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- Agree with your assessment from what I've read. Some of it is somewhat contradictory and some of the fulsome reference explanations, in my opinion anyway, don't justify the interpretations reached. I think scrutiny of the sources is needed. Willing to do some of that as time permits. Bill Reid | (talk) 16:33, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Haven't looked into the references themselves but my initial suspicion is this has been created with selective sources (see Background section in particular) as a means to reinforce the idea that lowland Scottish people are the same as English people in all significant historical aspects, thus diminishing Scots as a separate modern-day cultural identity. Crowsus (talk) 17:48, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
User script to detect unreliable sourcesEdit
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.
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.
This AfD might be of interest, as well as the precipitating deprecation of RailScot as a source (previously used in 1489 links from articles) which was recently decided without apparently notifying this project. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 23:14, 21 May 2022 (UTC)