IRC NA‑class (inactive)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject IRC, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.IRCWikipedia:WikiProject IRCTemplate:WikiProject IRCIRC articles NA This article has been rated as NA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

To help centralise discussions and keep related topics together, all WikiProject IRC talk pages redirect here.

Wikipedia:WikiProject IRC collaboration is based on IRC, in their Freenode channel #Wikipedia-En preferably, and jurisdicts all Wikipedia articles. This project takes place on Wikipedia and jurisdicts only IRC-related articles. Neal (talk) 13:46, 6 April 2008 (UTC).Reply[reply]

• Moved to: WikiProject IRC/to do

--Tothwolf (talk) 13:02, 6 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:15, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

I cannot spot this on Wikipedia:WikiProject_IRC so far. Are there any plans to add this? Yarcanox (talk) 20:19, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At some point, yes. I had planned to set it and some other things up but haven't been able to work my way through the backlog yet. Tothwolf (talk) 21:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will help you! I will update many parts in the comparison; next on my list is the latest stable version to add in the comparion / to create the templates in the existing articles! mabdul 0=* 17:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks! Glad to have the help. I hadn't advertised the WikiProject all that much and it is still very much a work in progress. It has come a long way [1] but there is still lots to do. Have you see the to do list? Tothwolf (talk) 06:18, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

yeah! I saw the list! I will look what I can do, my own list is very long o.O mabdul 0=* 12:30, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, we can wikify your to do list if it contains things we can add to the project to do list. I started the project to do list after I discovered that "mass prod" mess. Overall its not really too long, the detailed tables just make it look really long. I've not been able to work on the project to do list in a few weeks due to some AfDs and DRVs. It looks like I might have to deal with yet another DRV for two of the IRC-related user categories as well. Not fun. Tothwolf (talk) 19:17, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have many project I'm working on which doesn't handle irc! a search engine optimasation (my sandbox 3); one article about the web feed "rss" icon, one about the mobile acid test (similar to the acid3)... and soem more...

The comparison willl be more expanded by me similar to the comparison of wbe browsers. maybe we should remove the redlinks! and I want to expand the articles about the clients... If i have time :rolleyes: mabdul 0=* 15:42, 30 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The redlinks should probably stay for now because some of those articles will be restored and/or rewritten. It certainly takes a lot of time to fix this stuff. At least we now have a better category structure and a functional WikiProject. I am thinking of making comparison tables for IRC bots and IRC networks but those may be even more difficult than IRC clients. I'd like to add the official website links back to some of the comparison tables as well, as WP:ELYES indicates that these links are in fact acceptable per WP:EL. All links were recently removed from the Comparison of Internet Relay Chat daemons which has left those tables a mess. Without the links it isn't possible to easily find the official sites for the software and get additional information or verify/update information in the article itself. Tothwolf (talk) 21:37, 30 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please add JBouncer and ZNC. It seems that znc (http://www.znc.in) does not have a page at all —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.183.86.69 (talk) 04:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does your project care about what happens to the talk pages of articles that have been replaced with redirects? If so, please provide your input at User:Mikaey/Request for Input/ListasBot 3. Thanks, Matt (talk) 01:56, 12 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I add this project at Portal:Information_technology/WikiProjects. mabdul 07:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wasn't aware of that portal, good to know. I'm not sure if you noticed but I finally got the Article alerts stuff up and running. Tothwolf (talk) 07:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

THX, i'm watching now this page. I find this portal by accident: I wanted to remove the opera browser project(was deleted)... mabdul 08:11, 9 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, yes, I noticed the same thing with the Opera browser templates. Because someone them to MfD instead of TfD it left quite a mess. Tothwolf (talk) 17:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've finally had a chance to expand the to do list to include the Glossary and Comparison list articles section, see Wikipedia:WikiProject IRC/To Do List#Glossary and Comparison list articles. --Tothwolf (talk) 23:03, 4 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The IRC Network Wyldryde article needs expansion before added to the directory. Please edit HERE. Once I feel this is ready I will review the article and add it to the Wikipedia directory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piandcompany (talk • contribs) 20:49, 5 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've found it difficult to create articles about IRC networks since most of them don't get that much media coverage and only the historical or mega-networks tend to get written about in books. There are plans to create a Comparison of Internet Relay Chat networks and Glossary of Internet Relay Chat networks which would allow for better coverage of the smaller and medium sized networks. See Wikipedia:WikiProject IRC/To Do List#Glossary and Comparison list articles --Tothwolf (talk) 16:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is there a basic template for articles about IRC networks? Lekogm (talk) 15:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For an infobox? ((Infobox IRC network)) is an infobox for IRC network articles. Other templates can be found in Category:Internet Relay Chat templates. --Tothwolf (talk) 16:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have requested a list of popular pages for this project at [2]. --78.111.169.38 (talk) 10:12, 8 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've moved the ZNC (IRC bouncer) article to Wikipedia:WikiProject IRC/Sandbox/ZNC (IRC bouncer) in the WikiProject's sandbox. It had been undeleted for technical reasons but I had planned to request undeletion to allow for improvement or merging anyway. If anyone wishes to go ahead and work on it, feel free, I'm still working on sorting out some of the other articles and just finished adding refs to Konversation. --Tothwolf (talk) 03:57, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

After a recent request, I added WikiProject IRC to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject IRC/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 00:40, 1 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:26, 22 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

to match the line in the template. Pcap ping 21:45, 30 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P10 (protocol) was prodded, and given that the independent coverage did not support a separate article, so I've merged it to ircd. Someone knowleadgeable may want to expand the IRCd#Clustering section. Pcap ping 21:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Via Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Software I noticed that several IRC clients have been listed for possible deletion:

• Visual IRC
• Enhanced Programmable ircII Client
• Conspire (IRC client)
• Nettalk (IRC client)
• HydraIRC
• Colloquy (IRC client)
• AmIRC
• Quassel IRC
• IRCjr

Also a proxy:

• Bip IRC Proxy

Most are nominated under Wikipedia:GNG; please comment on notability of these clients if you have an opinion. Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 18:36, 31 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the IRC articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:09, 19 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recent changes were made to citations templates (such as ((citation)), ((cite journal)), ((cite web))...). In addition to what was previously supported (bibcode, doi, jstor, isbn, ...), templates now support arXiv, ASIN, JFM, LCCN, MR, OL, OSTI, RFC, SSRN and Zbl. Before, you needed to place |id=((arxiv|0123.4567)) (or worse |url=http://arxiv.org/abs/0123.4567), now you can simply use |arxiv=0123.4567, likewise for |id=((JSTOR|0123456789)) and |url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/0123456789 → |jstor=0123456789.

The full list of supported identifiers is given here (with dummy values):

• ((cite journal |author=John Smith |year=2000 |title=How to Put Things into Other Things |journal=Journal of Foobar |volume=1 |issue=2 |pages=3–4 |arxiv=0123456789 |asin=0123456789 |bibcode=0123456789 |doi=0123456789 |jfm=0123456789 |jstor=0123456789 |lccn=0123456789 |isbn=0123456789 |issn=0123456789 |mr=0123456789 |oclc=0123456789 |ol=0123456789 |osti=0123456789 |rfc=0123456789 |pmc=0123456789 |pmid=0123456789 |ssrn=0123456789 |zbl=0123456789 |id=((para|id|____)) ))

Obviously not all citations needs all parameters, but this streamlines the most popular ones and gives both better metadata and better appearances when printed. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 02:59, 8 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, is there any associated IRC channel for this project. (If I've missed it on the page sorry!) IRWolfie- (talk) 23:18, 21 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've added a new page to the project, WP:WikiProject IRC/Sources to show evidence for the reliability of sources used in articles about IRC. Its first entry, irc-junkie.org has been rehabilitated as a source. Even though it sure looks like a blog, it has been cited, listed or recommended in four books, as researched by Tothwolf and verified by me. --Lexein (talk) 00:45, 10 May 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please participate in the following merge discussion. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 06:11, 23 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 05:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

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)Reply[reply]

Hello all,

Is anyone active in this project as I'm looking for a collaboration to improve several articles related to the subject of IRC.

FockeWulf FW 190 (talk) 03:42, 13 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! I'm new as well to this WikiProject. I don't think the project has any clear leadership anymore, but if your wanting to collab on and further the project let me know. Cheers! --VA6DAH (talk) 04:29, 10 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@VA6DAH: I'm ready to start collaborating. FockeWulf FW 190 (talk) 19:43, 4 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject IRC/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject IRC.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

• The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
• The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
• The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject IRC, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template ((Transclude lead excerpt)).

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:42, 30 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from ((cite web)), ((cite journal)) and ((doi)).

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.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]