Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals/Collaboration/Past MCs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Polar bear (7 votes) was collaboration Feb 15-Mar 14 2008

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. . First choice Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 06:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. First choice. Marskell (talk) 10:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  4. UtherSRG (talk) 12:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  5. . Bobisbob (talk) 16:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  6. --MONGO 00:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  7. Anaxial (talk) 19:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Pros: Already has lots of sourced content; charismatic megafauna; lots of public interest; polar bears are in the news these days. Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 06:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Visibility: 150,000 views per month. We could possibly interest User:Yllosubmarine in this one. --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Already in good shape. Along with the Giant Panda, probably the best known Flagship species. Marskell (talk) 10:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Need capitalization. :D - UtherSRG (talk) 12:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • All right. Bobisbob (talk) 16:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Probably going to be listed soon as an endangered or at least a threatened species in the U.S. in the near future...[1].--MONGO 00:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia already has an overwhelming systemic bias towards quality articles on charismatic megafauna. I say we take a break and focus on something else. VanTucky 22:25, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
    • If this collaboration goes forward, we should attempt to balance things. If we do Polar Bear now, we shouldn't do Tiger next. Marskell (talk) 18:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Agreed... Primate or Mammal perhaps? - UtherSRG (talk) 19:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
        • Yeah, it would depend on how much gusto things have. If there is alot of activity, I'd say mammal, if very little, then a shoo in may be good.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:25, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
  • It's the first month; kicking off with something high profile makes sense to me.Anaxial (talk) 19:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Progress

[edit] Brown Rat (5 votes) was the collaboration Mar 15-Apr 14 2008

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. .Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. Second choice. Marskell (talk) 10:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. Bobisbob (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  4. VanTucky 04:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  5. Anaxial (talk) 19:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Pros: topical and important animal....Cons: a more ambitious project definitely...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm terrified of rodents. --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Rodents also scare the #$%@ out of me (I have rat dreams). But they are the single largest order of mammal and we should consider topic balance. Capybara is another one to consider. Marskell (talk) 10:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Okay. Bobisbob (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • My first pick. Distribued globally, and needs more work than most of the articles listed. VanTucky 04:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • A widely known and economically important animal (in its own way). This one would be my second pick.Anaxial (talk) 19:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Progress

[edit] Tiger (6 votes) was the collaboration Apr 15-May 14 2008

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. .Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. --Altaileopard. Looks good. Some more citations in the text would be nice... and I will expand the range a little more.
  4. -- Bobisbob (talk) 16:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  5. -- Anaxial (talk) 07:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
  6. -- Shyamal (talk) 11:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Like lion was last year, large and a bit of a mess. A few have poked into it a bit but would really need a concerted push and a collaboration would facilitate this. Also instrumental in making a Big Cats Featured Topic. A con is we have a number of cat articles so it may be good to do something really different....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Visibility/importance. This article gets viewed over 200,000 times a month! --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Looks good to me. Bobisbob (talk) 16:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Time for another high profile animal - and they don't come much higher than this. Anaxial (talk) 07:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Progress

Version before collaboration

[edit] Primate (3 votes) is the collaboration May 15-Jun 14 2008

Nominated 2008-04-14;

Support:

  1. UtherSRG (talk) 03:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
  3. Jack (talk) 16:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Pros: Already been reviewed a few times, so there are plenty of comments. Every Wikipedian is a primate. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 03:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Yep. In not bad shape and would be good to get this one over the line. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Can be worked on in conjunction with WP:PRIM. Jack (talk) 16:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Progress

Version before collaboration

[edit] Past unsuccessful nominations

[edit] Woolly Mammoth (5 votes)

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. . Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. Bobisbob (talk) 22:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  4. Anaxial (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
  5. Enoktalk 15:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Pros: no prehistoric mammals are featured....Cons: a more ambitious project as is currently a bit all over the place. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • We could probably interest User:Helioseus in this topic. --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Okay, I think it deserves a spot. Bobisbob (talk) 22:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Primate (4 votes)

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. UtherSRG (talk) 12:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. Bobisbob (talk) 17:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  4. Anaxial (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Pros: Already been reviewed a few times, so there are plenty of comments. Every Wikipedian is a primate. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 12:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Sounds good. Bobisbob (talk) 17:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Perfect - this is the sort of article (i.e. possibly quite a big one) which a collaboration may be good for.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mammal (3 votes)

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. .Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. VanTucky 04:39, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. Second choice. Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 10:14, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Obvious choice to lay the foundation of a portal, but may be a huge challenge first off if teh energy is lacking....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I've learned how to find the best sources for a species, but for the topic of mammal itself I'd be completely stumped. --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • A key article that is often overlooked and needs basic improvements. VanTucky 04:39, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Walrus (3 votes)

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. . Third choice Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 07:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. . Bobisbob (talk) 16:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. I HAS A BUCKET! JayHenry (talk) 06:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Pros: Already a Good Article. And doesn't everyone like the walrus? Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 07:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I agree. It's in very good shape. Bobisbob (talk) 16:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Although this one is extremely close. Might not even need a full collaboration. --JayHenry (talk) 06:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Yak (3 votes)

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. An important animal with a poor article. The article covers both domestic and wild yaks, and the wild species is currently Vulnerable. Considering that it is of more import to Asia, improving this would also go a long way towards countering a Western systemic bias. VanTucky 20:50, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. Enoktalk 15:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. Bobisbob (talk) 15:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


Comments:

  • Wow, what the heck? Everyone knows what a yak is, so why is this article so tiny? Enoktalk 15:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] California Sea Lion (2 votes)

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. What do you think? Bobisbob (talk) 03:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. .Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Pros: Contains good and detailed information on the animal and has a fair amount of references for its size. Bobisbob (talk) 03:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Yeah, could be a goer. It is manageable and there is a good base of information there. We've got a few sea mammals on the go but that ain't no crime...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • A few sea mammals, but none of the pinnipeds. Walrus is really close too. --JayHenry (t) 06:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Smilodon (2 vote)

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. . Bobisbob (talk) 22:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  2. JayHenry (talk) 06:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • This one needs some cleanup. Bobisbob (talk) 22:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I really think lack of extinct mammals is the biggest gap in our coverage. --JayHenry (talk) 06:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Brown Bear (1 vote)

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. .Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Pros: In pretty good shape, may not take a huge amount of work to push it over, and a topical and important animal....cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Monkey (1 vote)

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. UtherSRG (talk) 12:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Pros: Who doesn't love monkeys? :) - UtherSRG (talk) 12:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thompson's gazelle (1 vote)

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. Bobisbob (talk) 16:54, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  1. Pros: Looks in good shape to me. I think it needs a little more info. Bobisbob (talk) 18:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Plains Zebra (1 vote)

Nominated 2008-02-01;

Support:

  1. Bobisbob (talk) 22:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  1. Anybody wannna add? Bobisbob (talk) 22:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Spotted Hyena (1 vote)

Nominated February 4, 2008;

Support:

  1. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Thought you might like to take a look at this one and consider working on it. It's at least one user's favourite animal. I don't currently write articles, so am ineligible to support the nomination. Samsara (talk • contribs) 18:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • well 'spotted' - this one is another well-developed article that should at least be at GA for a stable version. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Dugong (1 vote)

Nominated February 11, 2008;

Support:

  1. Enoktalk 15:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments:

  • Pros: Significant & fascinating species currently vulnerable to extinction. Already has many quality citations, although the final few sections could still use work. Enoktalk 15:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] African buffalo (1 vote)

  1. Bobisbob (talk) 15:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pinniped (1 vote)

  1. Bobisbob (talk) 01:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)