Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Congress

Latest comment: 1 month ago by MediaWiki message delivery in topic Sherman Minton Featured article review
   MAIN        Talk        To do        Mem        Elec        Ord        Dist        Cmtee        Assess        Pop        Bio        Img        WikiList        Cleanup      
WikiProject U.S. Congress (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

See also:

Tracking recent changesEdit

Some of the best pages to track are trackable via your favorite RSS or atom reader. See Wikipedia:Syndication.

Recent changes RSS feed atom feed
Recent changes to 110th United States Congress RSS atom
Recent changes to 109th United States Congress RSS atom
Recent changes to United States Congress RSS atom
Recent changes to United States House of Representatives RSS atom
Recent changes to United States Senate RSS atom

Term startEdit

This may be a moot point by the time anyone sees this, but SO MANY editors, both registered and non, are changing incumbency dates for elected Congressional officials BEFORE their term starts. Now granted, January 3rd, today, they'd assume office, but it doesn't officially happen until noon, upon swearing in. (See: Liz Cheney, Joe Sempolinski, Van Taylor, etc.) WP:CRYSTAL would apply if it's changed before noon, correct? Snickers2686 (talk) 16:29, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I believe the consensus will be that January 3, 2023 is when their terms began, oath or no oath. It would look rather odd (for example) having a 3 or 4 'out of office' day gap, in the re-elected House members bios. GoodDay (talk) 06:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Committees in infoboxesEdit

Has removing committee assignments from infoboxes ever been considered? They seem to make them so cluttered and overly long while not really being all that necessary; any good article (John McCain for example) already has a "Committee assignments" section and they have a presence at the bottom of the page in the form of succession boxes. Joe Biden's page kind of fixes this by putting all the committees in a small section at the end, but why not just put it in the article body at that point? Krisgabwoosh (talk) 21:31, 6 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Project-independent quality assessmentsEdit

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 21:48, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sherman Minton Featured article reviewEdit

I have nominated Sherman Minton for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the 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" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:48, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]