Wikipedia talk:WikiProject RISC OS

What is a WikiProject and how is one established?

This introduction should explain things. A number of things should be done before a new project is established. With reference to the guidance, I have so far:

I've not found any such existing projects. Therefore (unless anyone else finds any that I've missed) the next step is to propose a new WikiProject.--trevj (talk) 16:44, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a current proposal regarding Restarting the computing collaboration. I've nominated the RISC OS article on the WP:COMP/C page, where you can add your name if you have the time/inclination to help.--trevj (talk) 07:21, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about that. Apart from your ultimate goal of raising the public profile of RISC OS, what do you want to do specifically? I'm not familiar with the Amiga community or their Wikipedia coverage, so can't compare. I could imagine reading an in depth analysis of the legal implications of selling beagle boxes with a pre-installed version of RO5 but that doesn't make it relevant for the rest of the world. OTOH I would agree that the main entry for RISC OS is terrible. --patric Dec 17, 12:14 pm

Thanks for your comments. What do I want to do? Basically, improve the information available - as you say, the main RISC OS entry could do with some changes. Regarding the Amiga community, I now see that in fact little recent work has been done - but perhaps that's because they've now achieved their goals. As for the legal implications of selling RISC OS kit, I don't think a Wikipedia article is the place for such speculation, although it should make reference to the owners, of course. While I've previously added the odd Acorn/RISC OS point here and there, it may be fruitless for me to rewrite the entire article, only to later read complaints about it. (Hmmm, I may almost be beginning to empathise with open source software developers here - except in the case of documentation, the learning curve is incomparable, i.e. almost anyone can contribute directly to Wikipedia.) So then, I guess I'll wait a few weeks and then see how much time I can find to have a go at starting things. (A first step may be the creation of History of RISC OS, allowing the main article to focus on functionality, strengths, limitations, etc.) I've also requested Stephen Streater's comments on here, as he's unlikely to be following the c.s.a.* newsgroups. I could also go through the process of directly contacting a few others who've made contributions - I'll see. The most likely scenario is that unless a few people come forward to discuss things/help out, I'll make a start and then make a further announcement for people to pull apart what I write! (I appreciate that not everyone reads the newsgroups, so will also contact the remaining RISC OS press.) --trevj (talk) 08:49, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

State only facts, reference everything, avoid opinion and guesswork, avoid advertising, avoid promotion. Wikipedia isn't a place to raise the profile of anything. The Acorn and RISC OS articles have, for years, suffered from people trying to use them as a springboard of 'You should use RISC OS, it's really great' and 'Acorn was especially important/relevant to the history of computing', bin that and maybe this wikiproject has a future.--Flibble (talk) 15:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, the "ultimate goal of raising the public profile" is what was inferred and is certainly neither what I stated nor what I intend. I completely agree that the articles should present "accurate and unbiased" information. --trevj (talk) 23:49, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I should add that outside Wikipedia I do feel that it would be beneficial to the RISC OS community if the profile were to be raised. The question then arises as to whether this a conflict of interest. Potentially, yes it could be. Despite this, I aim to make my edits neutral and am here to build an encyclopedia. Like many users, I have niche interests, but it should be noted that I do contribute to a variety of articles. I hope that this is clear and understood. Thanks. --trevj (talk) 09:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the mean time

Doing a bit of active house-keeping etc. is great stuff. Perhaps we could also look at bots to reformulate references. Article assessment will also be useful in order to learn from others. Please, if you're reading this and haven't already joined in, you could be bold and do so! Thanks. --trevj (talk) 15:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Scope

Identify the best scope

IMHO RISC OS and 8-bit Acorn should be separate projects, although in some cases it may be appropriate for pages to be categorised under both projects. Others may have different views, and further discussion of the scope of such a project will naturally progress from this point.--trevj (talk) 16:44, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the vast majority of RISC OS users are native English speakers, and I believe the English Wikipedia to have longer articles (and more of them), then naturally the English articles will be the initial focus. But with collaboration by speakers of other languages, it may be possible to migrate the project to other Wikipedias. Note that reverse migration will also be worth considering, e.g. the table on the RISC OS article in German. --trevj (talk) 16:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Structure

Identify the best structure

The Task force structure seems to the the most appropriate for us. "The fastest way to start a task force is to join the parent WikiProject(s)", i.e. WikiProject Computing/Members. Well, that bit's easy enough!--trevj (talk) 16:44, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a WikiProject

The articles I'd listed for Assessment on the WikiProject Computing pages, have now been assessed, showing that a awful lot of work needs to be done. Would it be worthwhile getting a project page setup for the RISC OS project? so we can keep track of pages that we think are within its scope (and their ratings), keep a list of people that are interested in helping and maybe keep a list of sites that we think have useful references on?--Flibble (talk) 15:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm definitely up for doing that, and for helping out when I can. But when I looked into it, I understood that it would technically be a Task Force of WP:COMP, although it could be termed 'WikiProject RISC OS'. I've been trying to collect some potential references, and will also consult my (so far, saved from being recycled) printed Acorn press at my parents' house. Note that it's my opinion that RISC OS should be reassessed. --trevj (talk) 15:30, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I don't think the importance rating has any particular relevance for us, we're welcome to raise the quality of any article we like. And I suppose in the grand scheme of things RISC OS's importance in the world is somewhere between none and 'comedy value'.--Flibble (talk) 16:00, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, but raising the article's importance may encourage more editor involvement from elsewhere, to give us guidance on principals/policies, etc. The Top label applies to Operating systems, languages, companies, important websites, or anything that forms the basis of all information, as you'll have read. Regarding the WikiProject, it's live! It's recommended to have 5-10 people for an effective task force. Although we're short of that, we can try to recruit outisde of Wikipedia. --trevj (talk) 16:37, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Having had a good look at the assessment template, individual task forces can add their own importance rating to articles to allow them to keep track of it internally. E.g RISC OS maybe Mid within Project Computing and Top within Project RISC OS.--Flibble (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Next steps

Please here discuss on this page. Please share the word about this project.--trevj (talk) 16:44, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: If you're unfamiliar with wikis, it's probably worth visiting the Sandbox first! Thanks. --trevj (talk) 21:21, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also note the suggested format for indenting replies.--trevj (talk) 08:02, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki markup is the language used for pages here on Wikipedia. The basics are fairly easy to get to grips with, although the finer intricacies of formatting require more consideration. But please don't let that put you off. Your help will still be useful, so share your opinions here if you're interested!--trevj (talk) 16:44, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]