Wikipedia:Collaboration of the week/Removed/2005/Archive 8

Nominated on June 22; needs 10 votes by July 6.

Needs expanding

Support:

1. Newbie222 01:47, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
2. Fenice 08:15, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
3. NatusRoma 22:26, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
4. PhatRita 29 June 2005 22:44 (UTC)
5. lots of issues | leave me a message 30 June 2005 03:16 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 23:10, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 6, 2005.

It needs a lot of expansion, not ready for AID.

Support:

1. Falphin 23:10, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
2. Revolución 23:25, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
3. NatusRoma 04:17, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
4. ℬ'que ▼ 18:21, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
5. Juppiter 16:46, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
6. Fenice 08:18, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Comments:

• I agree. Revolución 23:35, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 23:24, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by 7 July 2005.

This is a really important topic.

Support:

1. Revolución 23:24, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
2. Evil Monkey∴Hello 06:10, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
3. Rentastrawberry 03:02, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
4. Jon Harald Søby 14:31, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
5. RJH 18:39, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
6. Milena July 5, 2005 11:07 (UTC)
7. 500LL July 6, 2005 11:38 (UTC)

Comments:

• Could you stub it so those considering can judge the subject?

lots of issues | leave me a message 06:44, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• • Anyone here have a big library. This list my be useful. [1] Falphin 21:50, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A red link in the heading would have been a lot better than what is on Geology of the Moon now. No article is better than something like that. Jon Harald Søby 14:31, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. Blank articles are frustrating to users expecting info, unnecessary, inflate the count, and shouldn't exist! If anyone has a confident grasp of this subject - please stub it.

lots of issues | leave me a message 17:08, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I thought an article had to be so many words before it was counted as an article. Falphin 29 June 2005 20:33 (UTC)

• There is also the option of translating this from the featured article on the spanish Wikipedia es:Geología de la Luna. If this nomination fails, it can be nominated on WP:SPATRA.--Fenice 08:21, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• I found some articles on some lunar rocks in English wikipedia, such as Regolith, Norite, Dacite, Basalt, Gabbro. Not all of the articles on rocks have references to the Moon. KNewman July 1, 2005 11:44 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 23:28, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC); needs 15 votes by 14 July.

Support:

1. Revolución 23:28, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
2. Dmcdevit 23:44, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
3. Falphin 23:57, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
4. Pharos 19:24, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
5. Conrad Leviston 02:14, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
6. Fenice 08:39, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
7. lots of issues | leave me a message 29 June 2005 07:18 (UTC) Folks just vote for this - if we get all of these large region articles done with we can finally move on to fun stuff.
8. gren 1 July 2005 04:11 (UTC)]
9. Juppiter 1 July 2005 15:44 (UTC)
10. tijmz 5 July 2005 22:52 (UTC)
11. Elefuntboy 8 July 2005 03:25 (UTC)
12. Aecis 9 July 2005 12:19 (UTC)
13. Darwinek 10:12, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• I originally was going to nominate this article but after seing how other geography articles have been doing I withheld my nomination. While I'm still supporting it I would rather see articles like Western Europe on nomintion first. Falphin 23:57, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Hmm... Now that you mention it... --Dmcdevit 00:10, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Interesting I wasn't there then otherwise I would of voted for it. It wouldn't be a bad idea to renominate it to see what happens. Falphin 00:16, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• I too might have nominated a more populous region first, but Polynesia is much larger geographically than Western Europe or most anywhere else. Any cultural region that spans the world's greatest ocean is surely worthy of support.--Pharos 19:24, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 21:03, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 7.

Article suggested as a CotW during discussion of Human embryo nomination. A rather important topic with little content.

Support:

1. RJH 21:03, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
2. Revolución 21:07, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
3. Imperialles 00:05, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
4. KNewman 05:40, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)
5. PhatRita 29 June 2005 22:47 (UTC)

There really isn't that much to say about an embryo, I suggest that the focues should be on Embryogenesis--nixie 03:58, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 21:40, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 7.

See this discussion, [2]. Its an important topic with significant sub-pages

Support:

1. Falphin 21:40, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
2. IncMan 22:13, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
3. Fenice 21:09, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
4. gren 1 July 2005 04:10 (UTC)
5. Marqus 1 July 2005 05:39 (UTC)
6. Gamemasterv 2 July 2005 20:03 (UTC)

Comment:

• There is a very active Indian Collaboration of the Week WP:INCOTW. Maybe we should let the experts tackle that one.--Fenice 08:28, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Indo-Pakistani Wars was nominated for India COTW. Please see this discussion [3]. Thanks --IncMan 12:25, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

I guess I should of made the point of link above more clear. Sorry. Falphin 02:27, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 05:13, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC); needs 15 votes by 17 July.

Article on Tibet's most important city and spiritual home, but with almost no content.

Support:

1. Mona-Lynn 05:13, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
2. Hottentot 05:15, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
3. Revolución 06:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
4. Fenice 08:32, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
5. Falphin 02:22, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
6. NatusRoma 29 June 2005 05:33 (UTC)
7. gren 1 July 2005 04:07 (UTC)
8. RexNL 5 July 2005 15:35 (UTC)
9. Weirdperson11 9 July 2005 04:54 (UTC)
10. Lapsed Pacifist 9 July 2005 10:50 (UTC)
11. Aecis 9 July 2005 12:13 (UTC)
12. Poli (talk • contribs) 19:37, 2005 July 11 (UTC)
13. Jiang 16:38, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
14. Elefuntboy 01:46, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
15. Pyromonkeykw 08:18, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• For the same reason I nominated Havanna. Falphin 02:22, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 30 June 2005 05:15 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 7.

This is one of the most linked-to stubs in Wikipedia! It strikes me as a good general topic for COTW. We can talk about the process, different countries, the history, etc.

Support:

1. Dmcdevit 30 June 2005 05:15 (UTC)
2. lots of issues | leave me a message 30 June 2005 11:14 (UTC) 50-100 links and we only have one sentence? Surely the info is somewhere else.
3. Newbie222 6 July 2005 02:20 (UTC)
4. Falphin 7 July 2005 00:41 (UTC)

Comments:

• I wasn't going to vote for this originally but then I thought about it and realized an explanation on an overview section could be added and then overview on individual countries. Could be a quite lengthy article Falphin 7 July 2005 00:41 (UTC)

---

Nominated on June 30, 2005 17:26 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 7.

I am most surprised such an important cencept has not been the least elaborated on.

Support:

1. Circeus June 30, 2005 17:26 (UTC)

Comments:

• This was recently on the candidates list. [4]. How exactly would we do this topic. A bit of an outline and I'll consider it. Falphin 30 June 2005 18:14 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 18:03, June 24, 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 8, 2005.

One of the most important musical instruments in the history of humanity....gets only a couple paragraphs.

Support:

1. Revolución 18:03, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
2. Rentastrawberry 21:10, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
3. Falphin 21:17, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
4. Maitch 20:58, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
5. File:PhoenixSuns 100.pngPhoenix2File:Teamflag1.png 21:36, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
6. Fenice 08:32, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
7. kralahome 20:06, 1 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. Superm401 | Talk July 2, 2005 16:57 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 1 July 2005 16:22 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 8.

Support:

1. ZeWrestler 1 July 2005 16:22 (UTC)
2. Fenice 5 July 2005 19:50 (UTC)

Comments

• Important Southern Phrase used pre-American Civil War as a reason to keep slavery. - ZeWrestler 1 July 2005 16:23 (UTC)
  • No offense(I have been wrong before of course), but I don't think it will make it on the main COTW. Have you considered nominating it on the Southern COTW? Falphin 4 July 2005 01:11 (UTC)
    • Thats a thought, i'll nominate it for that later.--ZeWrestler 5 July 2005 18:20 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 2 July 2005 21:09 (UTC); needs 10 votes by 16 July.

I'm nominating this because it's linked to from over 1200 articles, and it's still a stub. I added a secton on measuring the depth of craters, but it could still use a lot of expansion. This is a basic concept in physics. -- Beland 2 July 2005 21:09 (UTC)

Support:

1. Beland 2 July 2005 21:09 (UTC)
2. Dmcdevit 2 July 2005 21:35 (UTC)
3. Titoxd 8 July 2005 22:44 (UTC)
4. mikka (t) 9 July 2005 00:45 (UTC)
5. Aecis 9 July 2005 12:16 (UTC)
6. ZeWrestler 12:24, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Poli 19:42, 2005 July 11 (UTC)
8. Deryck C. 17:06, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. Steven McCrary 18:52, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

Comments:

• One of the most deserving articles! --Dmcdevit 2 July 2005 21:35 (UTC)
• How much can be written about depth? Phoenix2 4th of July! 22:03 (UTC)
• Well, I found a reasonable amount to write about how the depths of craters are measured. I'm sure there's a lot to say about depth in oceans and atmospheres, about optical, depth, and so on. Though many depth-related concepts have their own articles, which should be linked to. -- Beland 7 July 2005 03:10 (UTC)
• The vast amount of articles linking to it is more than enough reason to nominate it. --Titoxd 8 July 2005 22:44 (UTC)
• Like Phoenix, I'm not sure how much can be written about depth, but I think it's definitely worth a try, especially in view of the many links to this article. Aecis 9 July 2005 12:16 (UTC)
• I also agree with Phoenix. The fact that there are many links does not mean that this should become an article. It's more like a dictionary definition, and this is why it has so many links to it. noamse
• Couldn't hurt to see what would come from a nomination like this. --ZeWrestler 12:24, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Agree with Dmcdevit. Poli (talk • contribs) 19:42, 2005 July 11 (UTC)
• An encyclopedia is useless if it can't deal well with simple science! Deryck C. 17:06, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• I expanded the Depth (disambiguation) page, which should give an idea about the depth (pun intended) of this subject, but for example: depth of water, length, height, depth, and pressure measurement (which ties to measurement, surveying, etc.), etc. Some of these issues are adequately explored on other pages, but a general physical science explanation of depth is still needed. Steven McCrary 18:52, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Nearly all the links I could see were from craters, which use a standard box. This should perhaps be linked to Depth of craters instead. Rich Farmbrough 12:54, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good point, perhaps bolstering the idea that the page is merely a depth-stub, in need of much expansion. Steven McCrary 13:27, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 4 July 2005 14:45 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 18.

This was last a COTW nomination(as far as I can tell) in October 2004. However with the history articles like Greece, and Scandinvia making it I believe this is even more deserving. Look at History of Europe to see how it could be done.

Support:

1. Falphin 4 July 2005 14:45 (UTC)
2. Fenice 5 July 2005 19:51 (UTC)
3. kaal 6 July 2005 06:13 (UTC)
4. 500LL July 6, 2005 11:42 (UTC)
5. Darwinek 10:14, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Jiang 16:39, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. CrossTimer 16:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:41, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

---

.

Nominated on 5 July 2005 21:28 (UTC); needs 10 votes by 19 July.

A good pair. Let's get rid of these large recongizable regional general overview article tasks - these broad articles are the measure of a comprehensive encyclopedia. COTW has always been plagued by a nagging need to write these articles. Well, let's just settle the matter and finish so we can be free to move on to the fun stuff.

Support:

1. lots of issues | leave me a message 5 July 2005 21:28 (UTC)
2. Falphin 5 July 2005 21:50 (UTC)
3. Fenice 7 July 2005 16:27 (UTC)
4. Dmcdevit July 7, 2005 18:54 (UTC)
5. ZeWrestler 12:22, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Poli 19:47, 2005 July 11 (UTC)
7. —thames 19:50, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. James 23:20, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on July 9, 2005 11:47 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 17 July.

Very important and complex subject. See Capitalism and q:Capitalism. Also, this article was near the top of Wikipedia:Most_wanted_articles(108 links) before I started the article with two brief sentences. Please improve in any way possible.

Support:

1. Djbaniel July 9, 2005 11:47 (UTC)
2. —thames 20:16, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. EatAlbertaBeef 15:51, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• It turns out those links are pretty much all from pages discussing its deletion. It was previously deleted and merged with Capitalism; I'm not sure it should be re-created. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Definitions of capitalism. -- Beland 01:11, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree, it looks like a good candidate for merging to me -- Joolz 23:11, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 15:00, July 11, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 18, 2005.

Small, everyday topics can and should warrant extensive articles. History and origin, makers, related technologies can make for an impressive article on things we use everyday.

Support:

1. Circeus 15:00, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
2. Fenice 10:26, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

• The article seems doable. Much of the information is already there in sub-articles.--Fenice 10:26, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 23:54, July 11, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 18.

This one doesn't even exist! Should be an interesting topic for COTW. However, it may require a knowledgeable chemist to assist us with its proper coverage.

Support:

1. KNewman 23:54, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
2. Deryck C. 12:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 16:24, 12 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 19.

During World War II, the FBI created this special branch to counter Nazi activities in South America.[5]

Support:

1. RJH 16:24, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Tearlach 22:49, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. EatAlbertaBeef 15:53, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:42, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 17:14, 12 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 19 July.

An important aspect of psychology, substantial links can be made to and from this article (e.g. Ostracism), I'm surprised that it's still a stub.

Support:

1. Mailer Diablo 17:14, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:42, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 22:18, July 12, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 19 July.

Psychodynamic psychotherapy is one of the more widely used and flexable systems of psychotherapy. It's article here is extremely inadequate.

Support:

1. JoeSmack (talk) 22:18, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
2. Fenice 07:03, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 05:03, 13 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 20 July.

This language article is very worthy of a lengthly article. It is currently only containing a small introduction section, with an infobox and a table of some words in the language. It is in need of history, grammar, vocabulary, writing system, poem, literature, classification and speakers sections. With a lot of work and help this could become a very good featured article.

Support:

1. Wackymacs 05:03, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. NatusRoma 02:09, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Fenice 07:12, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Chamdarae 02:32, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• While I like the idea of improving languages, I think a better way of doing things would to work our way down the List of languages by total speakers. See Below. Conrad Leviston 16:31, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• I think we need to improve the articles on a wide range of languages, not only those with large numbers of speakers (although those are certainly important too). There are still too few lengthy articles on Nilotic languages, and I support any move to improve this. Chamdarae 02:32, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 16:34, July 13, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 20, 2005.

Less than a stub, since most of the text at time of nomination is from the 1911 Britannica. This could be a good overview article covering facial anatomy, facial expressions of a large range of emotions, different faces in humans and other animals as well as evolution of faces, particularly in primates, face recognition, face perception, standards of facial beauty and faces in art, even how ethnic differences in faces are a basis of racism. (Perhaps a separate article human face might make sense.) The potential for illustration is obviously gigantic -- beyond its text, the article could grow into a grand gallery of faces, human or otherwise.

Support:

1. Eloquence* 16:34, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
2. ZeWrestler 16:38, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Wackymacs 20:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:44, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Comments:

• This article is in series need of help. --ZeWrestler 16:38, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I have added two anatomy diagrams to the article, and a few other sections including Health, Face Disease and Facial Surgery. I have also slightly improved the wording of the leading section of the article. I think this deserves to be a featured article, but first this article needs a lot of contributions - especially on the anatomy section which needs serious work. - Wackymacs 20:09, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 7 July 2005 18:42 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 21.

A terrible stub, about an important campaign. Was nominated in December last year and received 12 votes. [6]

Support:

1. Falphin 7 July 2005 18:42 (UTC)
2. Oberiko 7 July 2005 23:58 (UTC)
3. Newbie222 20:32, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Milena 15:56, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
5. Litefantastic 16:39, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. EatAlbertaBeef 15:46, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Anorris 23:57, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 7 July 2005 18:53 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 21.

This is almost ready for AID and I considered putting it there but this article could be expanded similarly to the Seventies. And its received 7+ votes on the COTW like 3times.

Support:

1. Falphin 7 July 2005 18:53 (UTC)
2. Darwinek 10:14, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Fenice 19:51, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Elefuntboy 05:17, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. ZeWrestler 12:21, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 23:12, 11 July 2005 (UTC) I think I nominated it once. Would be nice if it possed this time.[reply]
7. EatAlbertaBeef 15:50, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 7 July 2005 23:42 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 22.

As important as West or East Europe and we can't let TWID overtake us.

Support:

1. Falphin 7 July 2005 23:42 (UTC)
2. Juppiter 8 July 2005 03:20 (UTC)
3. Darwinek 10:15, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. —thames 20:07, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Jiang 15:59, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:41, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 9 July 2005 12:44 (UTC); needs 10 votes by 23 July.

Quite a large topic which can cover the advertising itself as well as the bans and regulations. I've created a small stub and added a few good external links ready for expansion.

Support:

1. violet/riga (t) 9 July 2005 12:44 (UTC)
2. Joolz 9 July 2005 18:43 (UTC)
3. Juppiter 02:24, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. slowpokeiv 18:40, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Elefuntboy 02:45, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:42, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Discussion:

Smokers of the world unite Juppiter 02:24, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This may now have to be withdrawn after I expanded it well beyond a stub - perhaps better as an AID candidate. violet/riga (t) 14:26, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Seems pointless to have this on any longer since it's not eligible, shall we remove it? -- Joolz 23:07, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. violet/riga (t) 07:45, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 22:30, July 15, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 22.

This article is about a concept that has so much potential. We owe the article lots more than what is there, which isnt much at ALL!

Support:

1. Naha|^(talk) 22:30, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
2. Fenice 06:40, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Howrealisreal 17:14, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:43, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 16:48, 14 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by The twenty-first. (pruned on 23 July)

Easy to research and genuinely important, the TWID, the COTW and the whole subfamily of themed COTWs are what keep Wikipedia up and running (at least to an extent). By supporting this article, you support yourselves.

Support:

1. Litefantastic 16:49, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Deryck C. 07:13, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. ZeWrestler 17:11, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

1. I would support this in the Wikipedia namespace. Maurreen 07:43, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. couldn't hurt to see what comes of this. --ZeWrestler 17:11, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 16:37, 15 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 22 July. (pruned at 23h, 23 July)

Over 10 million speakers, and no page exists for it yet

Support:

1. Conrad Leviston 16:37, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Deryck C. 11:35, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

• If this nomination fails here, try listing it on the Indian Collaboration: WP:INCOTW--Fenice 07:08, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• I've never heard of a Deccan language till today and a google search does not reveal too much info. =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:08, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

• Desi language has more hits, maybe that is the more common term. According to this Wikipedia-article List of languages by total speakers there are ten million speakers of deccan in India. Other names seem to be desi or dekini.--Fenice 07:23, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Honestly speaking, I've never heard of this language in India, and what astonishes me are its large numbers. I'm guessing that it is a term used for all the languages in the Deccan. "desi" means country or country language (village language). =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:33, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

• I did a Google-search using the number of speakers given in our table. This did turn up results: it must be an urdu dialect distinctive to the Deccan plateau. [7] [8] [9] [10]

and a video file is on here: [11]

There is not enough information to research this article from the internet though. --Fenice 09:56, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 16:40, 15 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 22. (pruned at 23h. 23 July)

So much potential in these post-Communism articles. I think they're fun.

Support:

1. Juppiter 16:40, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Youngamerican 13:45, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Joolz 23:10, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. 213.202.149.63 04:56, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• Here's an interesting story for those who aren't sure whether to support! http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article300319.ece -- Joolz 23:58, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 5 July 2005 14:25 (UTC); needs 15 votes by July 26.

Not nearly as good choices on the COTW now. Hoping this one is.

Support:

1. Falphin 5 July 2005 14:25 (UTC)
2. Phoenix2 5 July 2005 20:14 (UTC)
3. lots of issues | leave me a message 5 July 2005 21:30 (UTC) Not ready for idrive.
4. Newbie222 6 July 2005 02:20 (UTC)
5. Darwinek 10:15, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Milena 12:04, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
7. Poli 19:43, 2005 July 11 (UTC)
8. —thames 19:49, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. EatAlbertaBeef 15:44, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. Alarm 21:36, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
11. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:41, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
12. Norwegian83 23:12, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• That's an iffy COTW topic because there is almost enough information to send it to IDRIVE, but it gets my vote. Phoenix2 5 July 2005 20:14 (UTC)
• Well, I think there's a lot of information in the article, but it can be changed a little bit... Milena 12:04, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 7 July 2005 23:45 (UTC); needs 15 votes by July 28.

We had High Middle Ages as the COTW so why not Late Middle Ages. This one is the most lacking of the three.

Support:

1. Falphin 7 July 2005 23:45 (UTC)
2. Juppiter 8 July 2005 03:20 (UTC)
3. Fenice 19:51, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. NatusRoma 00:25, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Poli 19:46, 2005 July 11 (UTC)
6. Blueroan3 16:02, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Deryck C. 07:13, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. Conrad Leviston 16:17, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. Elefuntboy 01:47, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. PhatRita 00:07, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
11. kralahome 05:01, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
12. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:42, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
13. Norwegian83 01:15, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
14. Eixo 08:46, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

comments:

• This is no longer a stub, and therefore ineligable for a COTW, however at the moment it appears to be oncourse for being one. Will it be disqualified? -- Joolz 16:52, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 7 July 2005 18:10 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 14.

So much to talk about (architecture, designers, modern uses, &c., &c.) for so many different parks

Support:

1. Juppiter 7 July 2005 18:10 (UTC)

Comments

• Although not every Olympics has had a specific Olympic Park, most have had an Olympic Village (every one since the 1932 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles?). That article is also a substub. BlankVerse ∅ 04:41, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 7 July 2005 21:58 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 14.

This is one of the most notable of the 20th century U.S. Navy research organizations, and deserves good coverage

Support:

1. Harmil 7 July 2005 21:58 (UTC)
2. Poli 19:46, 2005 July 11 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 20:46, 13 July 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by 27 July.

This is a very important topic of an encyclopedia and I am surprised that this article doesn't even have a section about the anatomy of the human head. Similar to the requirements needed for the Face article, I think it should have a section about health, as well as head diseases; But the most important of all is the missing anatomy section which I myself cannot add because I do not have the knowledge to write a detailed scientific anatomy of the head. I hope to see this article improved to the featured article status because it deserves it. - Wackymacs 20:46, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support:

1. Wackymacs 20:46, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Naha|^(talk) 13:37, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
3. Kyleca 00:54, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Anorris 23:53, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
5. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:43, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
6. DAVODD 02:40, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
7. Eloquence* 06:28, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
8. KSchutte 18:36, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

1. We need to tell the story of how heads evolved. DAVODD
2. Face failed, let's at least pick this one.--Eloquence* 06:28, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 16:10, 11 July 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 25.

A topic that concerns everybody and it is just a stub.

Support:

1. Fenice 16:10, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. ZeWrestler 16:24, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Wackymacs 17:03, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Poli 19:46, 2005 July 11 (UTC)
5. Newbie222 20:32, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Matthew kokai 07:49, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. McCart42 (talk) 14:46, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. Steven McCrary 19:17, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
9. bjwebb 18:52, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. Fallstorm 18:09, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 19:42, 13 July 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 27.

Is one of the most important cities on the Med. and has a very long and important history. Needs expanding

Support:

1. Falphin 19:42, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Elefuntboy 02:46, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. EatAlbertaBeef 15:52, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Youngamerican 13:31, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:43, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Comment:

1. Not a stub. DAVODD 22:41, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 05:43, 24 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 30.

Every so often, people suggest that we should have a concerted fix-up effort of one type or another, but nothing much seems to come of these suggestions. I've heard that other-language Wikipedias do this sort of thing occasionally. Well, the list of articles to be wikified has gotten very long, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikification has gone inactive. It seems like the perfect subject for a time-limited collaboration - wikification is something that anyone can do, whether or not they know anything about the subject of the article.

So, I'm nominating this for Collaboration of the Week. If people think we should have a separate Wikification Week event on Wikipedia:Community portal, that'd be fine by me, too, if people would be interested in participating. -- Beland 05:50, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support:

1. Beland 05:43, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Deryck C. 08:41, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

1. This nomination doesn't belong in this project and should be removed. DAVODD 10:45, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
2. For the record, we now have Wikipedia:Maintenance collaboration of the week. -- Beland 05:31, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated at 23:19 on July 11, 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 25, 2005.

When I nominated this, back in March, it was nonexistent and gathered 14 votes. I decided to come back on it and build a working structure, and since There is little more I can seriously do, I'm renominating it.

Support:

1. Circeus 23:19, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
2. Falphin 00:31, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. gren 03:26, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Fenice 06:34, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Warofdreams 09:45, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. DAVODD 02:42, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
7. Jacoplane 11:50, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 19:15, July 13, 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by 27 July.

Physical science is one of the most important topics in an encyclopedia, however it may require the collaboration of several individuals to adequately and succinctly capture the scope topic. About 60 pages are currently linked to this page.

Support:

1. Steven McCrary 19:15, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
2. Maurreen 06:47, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Fenice 06:56, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Deryck C. 07:12, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Naha|^(talk) 13:38, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
6. ZeWrestler 17:10, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:43, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
8. DAVODD 02:41, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
9. KSchutte 18:34, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

1. Eek. How can we be a serious information source with stubs on vital topics such as this? DAVODD 02:46, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
2. Therefore we need your support. Deryck C. 17:41, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

.

Nominated on 07:02, 15 July 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by July 29.

Wow, I was surprised that this one was still a stub.

Support:

1. Beland 01:37, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Fenice 06:57, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Maurreen 07:45, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Wackymacs 22:42, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. ZeWrestler 17:13, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. DAVODD 22:25, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
7. Weirdperson11 02:36, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. EatAlbertaBeef 04:56, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. Trevor macinnis 17:04, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. Jacoplane 11:50, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
11. Magicmonster 15:46, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 22:37, July 20, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 27.

This affected 4 continents and millions of people, but only rates as a stub.

Support:

1. DAVODD 22:37, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
2. The Ogre 15:55, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 02:29, July 21, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 28.

Wikipedia has a treasure trove of academic-caliber content in regard to various forms of fandom. Many of our featured articles are the result of contributions of fan folk. It seems resonable that the parent aticle of the history, development and forms of this popular culture phenomenon be fully fleshed out and encyclopedic.

Support:

1. DAVODD 02:29, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
2. Circeus 20:02, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
3. PKM 02:42, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Litefantastic 23:51, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated on 03:34, 22 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 29.

Posted for cleanup since September 2004. Pretty much everyone should be able to contribute. Would be a valuable resource for student readers and maybe even Wikipedia editors.

Support:

1. Beland 03:34, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. KSchutte 18:37, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated on 21:20, July 23, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by July 30, 3005.

Currently, much of Olive, which is supposed to be about the genus olea, discusses material that belongs either in Olive (fruit) (also in need of an overhaul, btw) or European olive.

The article is also the improper hub center of links from articles discussing both the species Olea europea (e.g. the European olive, again) and the Olea genus, generating a mess of improper wikilinks across all wikipedias. Linked articles include the French and German featured articles about that tree.

Support:

1. Circeus 21:20, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 21:16, 25 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 1st.

I am nominating this article (which I have worked a bit on) because I feel that it can be improved through collaboration. For example, heraldic terms could be clairified for those not familiar with heraldry, and more images of armorial bearings could be added.

Support:

1. Mb1000 21:16, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• Should be moved to the Article Improvement Drive section. KNewman 12:34, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 15:50, July 24, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 31 July.

This seems to be a significant enough movement with its own activities/history/events and tens of thousands of Google hits -- but until I made a stub article for it Wikipedia had nothing on it at all.

Support:

1. Aris Katsaris 15:50, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
2. EatAlbertaBeef 04:58, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. DAVODD 04:01, July 29, 2005 (UTC)

Nominated on July 24, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 31 July.

This is a stub, there should definitely be more about this, millions of people do it every day. Support:

1. --Zxcvbnm 17:04, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated on 17:25, 19 July 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by August 2.

Important concept involving jobs. Considering the recession that started after the dot com boom, this would be an important topic to people in computer fields. Furtherman, a history of job securtiy can date back ot pre World War II where the Great Depression left many jobless on the streets. Therefore, because of the broadness that could be done with this topic, I nominated it for COTW.

Support:

1. ZeWrestler 17:25, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Howabout1 ^{Talk to me!} 17:35, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
3. Alarm 21:46, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. EatAlbertaBeef 17:45, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 20:43, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
6. Jacoplane 11:50, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. --Zxcvbnm 18:06, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• It is important that this is not treated mainly as the opposite of unemployment. Equally important is that it is not written from a specific U.S. perspective. However, there is great potential for the article. For example, contributors from different parts of the world can compare how layoffs are regulated by legislation and collective agreements. / Alarm 21:46, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is a very good point that I did not think about with this article. I just heard on CNN that Egypt has a high unemployment rate of 25%. I wounder what the job security is like there. Also, I know in France, if you have to fire someone, you actually have to take them to court inorder to fire them. I'll deffinetly make an adjustment on the article to anticipate for other nations besides the U.S. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 12:55, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 13:10, 26 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 1 August.

This is such a large series of games with so little information on the individual games, that I think it should be nominated. There's good info on the series as a whole, but each game is relatively neglected.

Support:

1. Masamunecyrus 13:10, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 22:19, 27 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 3 August 2005.

We already have quite extensive and detailed articles on the Soviet space program, the Space program of the United States, the European Space Agency, and the Space program of China. The Japanese program is one of the more advanced of existing programs, and can easily and profitably be expanded quite quickly into a workable state.

Support:

1. Thames 22:19, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Deryck C. 05:47, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Jacoplane 11:49, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Fenice 08:31, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

• C.f. Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency.

---

Nominated on 04:16, 20 July 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by August 5.

They were one of the top contributors to art in the 20th century. Their amazing plays are classics,and all they get is five sentences and a list of works?

Support:

1. kralahome 04:16, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Deb 21:57, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Juppiter 15:38, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Someonesmask 22:39, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Dmn / Դմն 20:06, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Fenice 08:38, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Arcticsno 10:43, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Great idea! Who doesn't love Rodgers and Hammerstein? This should be a featured article, not a stub. Juppiter 15:38, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated on 00:35, July 31, 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by August 13, 2005.

Political party is a fairly complete article, yet this major concept is left as a substub!

Support:

1. Circeus 00:35, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
2. CG 08:11, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
3. Rentastrawberry 17:28, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
4. EatAlbertaBeef 18:09, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 21:12, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
6. Sesel 07:00, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 04:08, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. PeepP 18:57, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
9. Trevor macinnis 12:55, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 04:51, July 31, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 6.

Communications have been a vital part of the world as we know it. Shouldn't there be more information about it.

Support:

1. Rentastrawberry 04:51, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
2. --Wonderfool t(c) 17:27, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Object:

1. Rentastrawberry 18:29, July 31, 2005 (UTC). See comment

Comment:

• It has just been brought to my attention by Circeus that Communications is a

disambiguation page, therefore I can no longer support this page as a candidate for cotw. Rentastrawberry 18:29, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

• You should choose one of the different meanings of Communications ans nominate it for COTW. CG 08:08, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

---

.

Nominated on 18:30, 20 July 2005 (UTC); needs 15 votes by August 12.

Classic African-American song, well known. Song is part of many schools music curriculums, and is also a game. Needs much more info.

Support

1. taylorr 18:33, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
   • All of these are socks, no vote from me, ah i see Circeus allready did this, my bad. This link is Broken 14:07, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
     • Then I gues it's time for archiving this. Circeus 14:10, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
   • CamRon 14:21, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
   • CaryBear 15:41, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
   • Happycrowny 12:23, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
   • Annieisok 15:01, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
   • Yeahmon 11:13 30 July 2005 (UTC)
   • Bigcheeks 13:49 1 August 2005 (UTC)
   • Crybaby 13:02 2 August 2005 (UTC)
   • Aintdatjustabeesknees 15:54 3 August 2005 (UTC)
   • PhilCollinsFreakout 14:22, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
   • Koolio 22:08, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
   • Jimneutronsorry 22:14, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
   • Pootydutetoot 17:14, 5 August 2005 (UTC) [reply]

• Comment None of these users except the nominator has made edits to pages other than their own user pages or this voting page. Sockpuppetting is suspected and suspicions have been reported to the admins. Circeus 14:02, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Nominated on 23:44, 31 July 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 7 2005.

This article is in a sad state, and includes very little information besides a picture and an infobox.

Support:

1. AlbertR 23:44, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. DoubleBlue (Talk) 13:10, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

comments

• You might want to offer it over at the Canadian collaboration instead. Circeus 23:50, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 14:12, August 1, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 8 August.

An important cultural phenomenon that deserves proper attention.

Support:

1. KNewman 14:12, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
2. —thames 17:48, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Fenice 19:24, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jpbrenna 23:07, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

1. After close, sorry: In fact, there is Iconography article, and I've just created the redirect there. mikka (t) 20:32, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 17:27, August 1, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 8.

This is a small article with no substance at all. It should be developed greater.

Support:

1. Rentastrawberry 17:27, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 08:43, 2 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 9.

This is article is really desperate for expansion and new information.

Support:

1. edgeworth 08:43, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 21:13, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
3. Sesel 06:59, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

1. Not a stub. May not be eligible to be a COTW. --Wikiacc (talk) 18:59, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. This is quite a large article already. —Lowellian (talk) 18:46, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

1. Considering the lack of information I could see it classified as a stub. Lhasa was about as large when it became cotw. edgeworth 01:32, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

---

Nominated on 20:20, 2 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 9 August 2005.

This important article is a mere stub and should be expanded.

Support:

1. --Zxcvbnm 00:22, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 11:12, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
3. --Alan Au 09:08, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated on 13:46, August 6, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 13.

While we have a very good article on gardening, garden is made almost entirely of lists, the only actual content being the 2 paragraphs of the lead section!

Support:

1. Circeus 13:46, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
2. --Aeryka 16:39, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 11:04, August 7, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 14.

This is a widely practiced activity with almost no information.

Support:

1. —Lowellian (talk) 11:04, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
2. -Aranel ("Sarah") 19:04, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Pschemp | ^Talk 20:05, 7 February 2006 (UTC) (If someone could get a hold of a cosmetology textbook that would be a great resource)[reply]

---

Nominated on 15:33, 8 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 15 August 2005.

This has the potential to be a truly spectacular COTW. Letters are an extremely common form of communication that are currently very poorly covered by Wikipedia. There are innumerable resources for letter-writing and the history of different types of letters through the ages available on the internet, or in study guides, etc. This article could cover personal letters, love letters, business letters, cover letters, ancient letters (e.g. new testament), letters as historical sources, letterwriting as an art or as part of good manners, penpals, stationary, letters vs. email. This will be easy to improve very rapidly.

Support:

1. —thames 15:33, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Foxmulder 03:52, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. --Polynova 03:11, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 22:17, August 9, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 16 August 2005.

This article has some serious potential, however, it's almost nothing. Definitely an example of an article that need to be part of COTW.

Support:

1. MessedRocker 22:17, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

1. This is a disambiguation. Rentastrawberry 03:52, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

Comment:

1. Maybe it should not remain a disambiguation page. A notice at the top could alert readers to another page called apparition (astronomy). Most people think of the word aparition as being approximately synonymous with ghost. Michael Hardy 22:54, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 01:44, 10 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 17.

It's a famous company but right now it's just a redirect.

Support:

1. The Free Encyclopedia 01:44, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. § 21:31, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

The vote above doesn't count a vote as it is from an anonymous user. If you're the user who left this vote, please kindly change your signature. Deryck C. 10:04, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - votes from anonymous users should only be disregarded if made in bad faith. Everyone is free to participate in wikipedia - an account is optional. Proto t c 10:36, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the top of the page, you'd know there's a rule explicitily invalidating unregistered users' votes.--Army1987 09:24, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

.

Nominated on 16:38, 10 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by Aug 17.

It's one of the most important Architectural movements at the moment and it doesnt even have a picture

Support:

1. Richy 16:38, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Fenice 17:05, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. shuri 08:45, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Warofdreams
5. --Mcginnly 13:44, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
6. M0llusk 20:09, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

.

Nominated on 08:58, 4 August 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by August 18.

Support:

1. Fenice 08:58, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Volatile 19:43, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. shuri 12:41, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. RJH 19:44, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Richy 20:02, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. lots of issues | leave me a message 03:23, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 13:25, 11 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 18 August.

A very relevant article to racing, particularly horse racing and athletics, as well as to photography. Couldn't believe there was no article on this (until a discussion on the Reference desk) got it started. Still a stub, but potentially could be a great article.

Support:

1. Proto t c 13:25, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Dmn € Դմն 18:55, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

.

Nominated on 14:53, 11 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 18 August 2005.

This is an extremely important process in current world events, and something that regularly comes up in the news. There is a wealth of information in the news media and think tanks, on the past rounds of the negotiations, and on strategic aspects of the talks. They were an issue in the 2004 U.S. presidential campaign, and the 4th plenary is currently in recess right now. Wikipedia desperately needs to whip this article into shape so that when people Google the talks, they get more than just a stub. As I said, information on it is plentiful, there are supporting articles on wikipedia concerning U.S. relations with the DPRK, with South Korea, with China, Russia and Japan, etc, as well as the various nuclear programs of the world. We can do a lot here very quickly.

Support:

1. —thames 14:53, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Fenice 17:06, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Visviva 04:05, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

---

Nominated on 00:38, 5 August 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by August 19.

This article, consisting of one sentence that implies the subject is of great importance...and then three unintroduced links to other articles (suggesting that we have only fragmentary/incomplete coverage of the subject we've already indicated as important), is shockingly barren. If we can't do better, I'd almost prefer a red link. Clearly this topic is massive (and I know from experience that tackling massive topics by myself doesn't end in a good product or a happy editor), and I'm hoping others agree.

Support:

1. Jwrosenzweig 00:38, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Fenice 08:54, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. —thames 14:09, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Newguineafan 16:22, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
5. Live Forever 00:24, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Aranel ("Sarah") 19:02, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Jsnell 22:14, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. gren グレン 13:09, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. Chicheley 05:30, 6 July 2006 (UTC) This should not be a disambiguation page.[reply]

---

Nominated on 19:50, 8 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 15 August.

Several articles link to this article.

Support:

1. Squideshi 19:50, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Jpbrenna 23:42, 11 August 2005 (UTC) (I might be DQ'd: my great-grandfather was a minor cog in it.)[reply]

---

Nominated on 04:40, 8 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 15.

It's an article about Wikipedia itself.

Support:

1. 68.23.36.19 04:40, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Ha ha.... Very funny. —thames 14:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Psh...angela the PM haha. CAn we take it down now? — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 04:09, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• This will certainly be FA on April 1, 2006. lots of issues | leave me a message 05:17, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 02:23, 14 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 21 Aug.

This court system is very complicated, and it's important to understand for students of history and comparative government. There needs to be a summary of UK-wide jurisdictional bodies, such as the Privy Council, the House of Lords, and the new Supreme Court; and an overview of judicial practices, traditions, and structures in the three jurisdictions. -- Beland 02:23, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support:

1. Beland 02:23, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 22:29, 14 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 22, 2005.

Having worked on Italian TV since the first regular broadcasting started, that is for more than half a century, he is considered the symbol itself of television. A good encyclopedia can't lack a decent article about him.

Support:

1. Army1987 22:29, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• It'd be hard to find information about him. Collaborations work best when the information is easily available on wikipedia. They work second-best if the information is easily available on the web. They don't usually work so well on more obscure subjects where half of the hits seem to be in Italian. gren グレン 18:52, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Wikipedia:Collaborations of the Week/U.S. child labor laws

Nominated on 15:01, 24 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 31.

Mass media might be lacking, although not a stub. But the Media industry article, describing a growing and very important sector of the world economy, is only one paragraph. Desperately needs more, and would also be a good subject matter for a collaboration. (Also note that Entertainment industry is about as bad. Which is interesting, considering the fact that the coverage of its products could be said to be one of the strong points of Wikipedia...)

Support:

1. Alarm 15:01, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 15:51, 21 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 28 August.

This is a great topic that really deserves to be expanded!

Support:

1. Nick Catalano (Talk) 15:51, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Trevor MacInnis(Talk | Contribs) 03:39, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 03:36, August 21, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 28.

Former king of Arabia, and spiritual Imam to many

Support:

1. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 03:36, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
2. Darwinek 18:45, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 18:34, 19 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 6:33 PM August 26, 2005 (UTC).

This is a stub article that I'm sure can be expanded. It was just on articles that need to be wikified until a few days ago. I cleaned it up and added a picture. Perhaps we can find a history or something of the like.

Support:

1. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 18:34, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 05:49, 19 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 26 August.

This article's current state of neglect leaves a lot to be desired. It could easily become a featured article with very little community effort.

Support:

1. Magicmonster 05:49, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2.  ~shuri 10:35, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Alan Liefting 08:12, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 00:50, 19 August 2005 (GMT); needs 5 votes by August 26.

An immensly popular politician who was very influential in the politics of Northern Ireland and who is likely to die soon - the page will get many hits in the next few weeks.

Support:

1. Dmn € Դմն 00:53, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• It's not really a stub and generally when important people die this happens so it get's improved anyway. -- Joolz 11:03, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've just noticed she's now died :/ [12]  :-( -- Joolz 11:07, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 14:04, 18 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 25.

Top European destination, yet still a stub. Quite astounding

Support:

1. lots of issues | leave me a message 14:04, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• Most of the information that could go on the Monte Carlo page is already in Monaco, as there is very little of Monaco that is not Monte Carlo. Proto t c 10:42, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 16:12, 16 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by August 23.

These have been a big issue in Iraq right now, killing many soilders and civilians alike. I think we can add a lot to this article based on whats been in the news latly.

Support:

1. ZeWrestler ^Talk 16:12, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 19:14, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
3. Geni 11:34, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Sir hugo 20:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 05:19, 13 August 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by August 28, 2005.

A strange, interesting, new way of looking at the world, this movement is quickly gaining momentum. Several books have or are being written about it, magazines are focusing material on it, and other media are reporting on its gaining influence. It should have a rounded out article here, as the internet, and its affect on people lives, is partly involved. (Full disclosure:I created the stub)

Support:

1. Trevor macinnis 05:19, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Fenice 12:31, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. shuri 11:55, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 03:18, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
5. Yodakii 05:08, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Cmadler 12:05, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Johntex 02:16, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. Interesting. - Darwinek 14:25, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated on 03:40, August 16, 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by August 30.

The article on the precursor of instant messaging is in a very bad shape.

Support:

1. Circeus 03:40, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
2. -Aranel ("Sarah") 22:11, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Nyergh, icky. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 18:34, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4.  ~shuri 12:10, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. --roger6106 15:47, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. --AllyUnion (talk) 08:55, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Moved to Article Improvement Drive

Nominated on 20:05, August 26, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by September 2, 2005.

A major global event. This article has been vandalized and is missing a lot of information. This really should be up to Feature Article status considering that it has its own category.

Support:

1. Zhatt 20:05, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

• You should take this to WP:AID, it doesn't meet COTW criteria.—thames 22:29, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Moved to WP:AID. Thanks. Zhatt 22:48, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 17:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by September 2, 2005.

The first powered, piloted aircraft deserves a comprehensive article.

Support:

1. Cmadler 17:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. inks 01:32, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Johntex 02:19, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 03:14, 30 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 5 September.

This article is in bad shape. First, content inappropriately put in History of science was dumped into it. It has been sitting around for many months, fairly neglected and fairly disorganized. I have recently attempted to impose a structure roughly parallel to "History of science", but most of the sections - indeed most of the main articles on histories of sub fields - remain entirely unwritten. This is core encyclopedic content which is sadly missing from the wiki. This topic is big enough to benefit from an entire WikiProject, but a COTW would be a good start. -- Beland 03:14, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support:

1. Beland 03:14, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Trevor MacInnis(Talk | Contribs) 03:40, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

• This article is far too long to be considered for COTW. Perhaps it should be moved to WP:AID? (Teryx 07:01, 1 September 2005 (UTC))[reply]
• So moved. -- Beland 05:09, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 20:03, 18 August 2005 (UTC); needs 15 votes by September 6.

At present there is a modest section on the Education page about the history of education. But the development of education and the school systems would seem to be a very rich and important topic that deserves its own much-expanded page. Thanks!!!

Support:

1. RJH 20:03, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Bancroftian 5:02, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
3. Trevor MacInnis(Talk | Contribs) 00:16, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. – Quadell ^{(talk) (sleuth)} 03:22, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
5. SimonP 13:21, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
6. Junes 14:43, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Usrnme h8er 15:22, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. Neutrality^talk 02:18, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
9. NuclearFunk 00:36, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. This should be a difficult one in terms of avoiding systematic bias. Although I fear it will be westocentric I'll give my vote. --Oldak Quill 12:12, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
11. gren グレン 12:21, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
12. Yes, this topic deserve more elaborate treatment. --Bhadani 14:39, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
13. Dkasak 07:43, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

• Currently a redirect to education (which contains a history section). --Oldak Quill 12:12, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 17:06, August 23, 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by September 6.

Many clothing-related articles are sorely lacking or inexiastant. Of all the Regional styles of clothing, this one is the only existing, and not only POV, but badly written.

Support:

1. Circeus 17:06, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
2. Newbie222 23:33, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Janet13 06:14, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Very stubby. Mark Lewis 15:06, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Darwinek 14:23, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 02:49, 25 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by September 1.

Is there anything more important than those soggy bits of grain we slurp down every morning? I think not! I stumbled on this by chance, and added the "History" section to beef it up a bit, but our article on cereal is still very American-POVed and lacks any nutritional, scientific (though I'm not sure what would go there), marketing, or cultural impact context. Breakfast cereal doesn't deserve to be passed over!

Support:

1. The PNM 02:49, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Richy 09:56, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Johntex 02:17, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

• I don't think it mets COTW requirements. Circeus 15:39, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 03:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 2 September.

Although the article has more than two paragraphs, it is still a stub considering its expansive potential to develop into a very informative article that is of interest to a wide number of people.

Support:

1. Plastictv 03:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. lots of issues | leave me a message 17:56, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

• Category:singing and subcategory:vocal ranges are quite well populated. (Sorry, I've forgotten how to put the link to the category without making this page a category member) --bodnotbod 05:46, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
  • You do that by adding a colon before "Category", like this: [[:Category:Singing]], and you'll get Category:Singing and Category:Vocal ranges. There may be individual articles that deal with each topic related to singing, but surely the article "Singing" itself needs to present a more comprehensive picture as a whole. --Plastictv 07:25, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 16:35, August 26, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by September 2, 2005.

Perhaps one of the most popular theater critics for in the Chicago area is only a stub

Support:

1. —MESSEDROCKER (userpage) (talk) 16:35, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 01:33, 30 August 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 6 September.

The name of Northern Ireland is a major part in the conflict in Northern Ireland between nationalists and unionists - a detailed article about this will improve Wikipedia's coverage of the important conflict.

Support:

1. Talrias (t | e | c) 01:33, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 14:14, 1 September 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by September 8.

Has no mention of the modern meaning of a place to work out in.

Support:

1. Richy 14:14, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1. Leptictidium 13:18, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 02:56, 28 August 2005 (UTC); needs 10 votes by 10 September.

Hula is a very important tradition to, not only Hawaiians, but to many Polynesians, each with their own cultural dances, which can be considered related dances of Hula, or actually forms of Hula itself.

Support:

1. RyGuy 02:56, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Tεxτurε 18:54, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Marshman 20:42, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Wat Da Moe 07:11, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Plastictv 00:02, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Insane Panda 08:45, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Kewp 15:32, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. Leptictidium 12:20, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. Mamawrites 11:49, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. --Ling.Nut 23:13, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 13:24, 2 September 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 9 September.

Being such a canonical, standard, little-changing subject, biology articles should have quite a lot of information, and the Afrosoricida article is very small in comparison to others such as Cetacea or Carnivora. Even if it's not a stub, expanding Afrosoricida would be a good job.

Support:

1. Leptictidium 13:24, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 05:21, 5 September 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 12 September.

I was looking for information that gave me more about how long the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve reserve might last, and I didn't really find it (other than in the article itself). So I started List of oil-consuming states (because I could only find List of oil-producing states) and am nominating "Energy consuption" to provide more general coverage. How much energy does a light bulb use? How much does our country use? What about energy efficiency? Energy conservation, Energy efficiency, Energy development, and Energy#Energy use don't seem to cover these kinds of nuts-and-bolts facts. -- Beland 05:32, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support:

1. Beland 05:21, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Dkasak 07:40, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Shiftchange 16:10, 11 April 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 00:43, September 8, 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by September 15, 2005.

Not only is this an important disease worldwide, but people are dying of dysentery in the U.S. due to the aftereffects of Hurricane Katrina. The article needs a lot of love.

Support:

1. – Quadell ^(talk) 00:43, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 10:26, 5 September 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 12 September 2005.

Its been in my "to-do" list for a bit. And then i havent done it

Support:

1. Wonderfool t(c) 10:26, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Shanel 03:27, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

Nominated on 12:32, 8 September 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 15 September 2005..

it has many unwritten sections

Support:

1. Melaen 12:32, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. —thames 21:46, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Darwinek 08:56, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Anthony Aragorn 13:36, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on SimonP 21:09, September 8, 2005 (UTC); needs 5 votes by 15 September 2005..

This page is meant to cover the history of France from 1945 to the present, but it is very short and completely fails to cover many important subjects.

Support:

1. SimonP 21:09, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
2. —thames 21:46, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Juppiter 01:24, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Needs 6 votes by September 18

Support:

1. Neutrality^talk 15:51, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
2. Newbie222 00:24, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Juppiter 06:37, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Milena 14:45, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Walter Chan 20:03, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. --Mark J 21:08, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. *drew 03:59, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments We need to make this in into more than a CIA cut-and-paste. Neutrality^talk 15:51, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

---

Nominated on 18:17, September 11, 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by September 18.

How an article on such a successful football manager manages to have only 3 lines is beyond me!

Support:

1. Ben davison 18:17, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
2. Anthony Aragorn 09:14, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 22:24, 14 September 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by Sep 21 2005.

Could do with some improvement.

Support:

1. D Gonzo 22:24, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. --Richy 01:18, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Why is this article even on Wikipedia? The rules to a movie drinking game don't strike me as being especially encyclopediac, let alone cause for a CotW... Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. MC MasterChef 08:46, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• This sounds like the equivlant to the Halo drinking game that me and my friends at the dorm came up with. Everytime you miss your target, you drink.--ZeWrestler ^Talk 14:18, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 20:38, 15 September 2005 (UTC); needs 2 votes by September 22.

An article about one of the most important human activities with just a paragraph on it

Support:

1. KNewman 20:38, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Reflex Reaction 13:29, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Ataru 00:03, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 18:50, 16 September 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by September 23.

Mysterious spheres of stone over 2 meters in diameter, it's like the New World's Stonehenge!

Support:

1. Fxer 18:50, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. CHAIRBOY (☎) 03:31, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. -- Rune Welsh ταλκ 11:02, 28 September 2005 (UTC) (Hope it's not too late to vote still).[reply]

---

Nominated on 01:18, 18 September 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by September 25.

Grasshopper is badly in need of work; though it is a common type of insect, all Wikipedia has for it right now is a sentence and the standard species box. This stub could use the improvement.

Support:

1. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 01:18, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 20:22, 25 September 2005 (UTC); needs 6 votes by October 9, 2005.

This is a fundamental and basic section of a CPU. I am shocked to see this article as short as it is. This should be developed. There are many resources online and in libraries about it.

Support:

1. ZeWrestler ^Talk 20:22, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Denis Kasak 16:31, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. x1987x 21:54, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Dan M 00:25, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. AnyFile 20:25, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. nihon 00:57, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 00:13, 30 September 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by October 6.

As such a basic article concept, this definitely needs some improvement. This could easily become a huge article - history of defense, how it's changed, basic concepts of defense, the list is endless.

Support:

1. ChewyLSB 00:13, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Batmanand 17:11, 15 October 2005 (UTC) Shamefully short.[reply]

---

Nominated 09:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC); needs 12 votes by 11 December

I was nominating this because it's the site's most wanted stub, with 7808 pages linking to it as of Oct 29, and I noticed it had been previously nominated. -- Beland 09:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support:

1. Beland 09:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. —Jwanders^Talk 20:05, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 14:24, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Rmrfstar 06:55, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. - Sites most wanted stub? definitely - Hahnchen 13:42, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Tothebarricades 07:39, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. CrossTimer 12:39, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. of course Yellowmellow45 13:15, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. Pyro19 20:53, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. Gflores ^Talk 21:20, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
11. Davodd 00:58, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
12. Soul assassin 11:28, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
13. RJH 23:24, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 20:56, 30 September 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 7 October.

France is the most promiant example of Absolutism in the 17th and 18th centuries. Someone has finally given it its own (if not very wikified) article. 130.160.86.143 20:56, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support:

---

--mitrebox 21:54, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated on 11:15, 2 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 9 October.

The centerpiece of main street culture in any developed part of the world. Sorry stub.

Support:

1. lots of issues | leave me a message 11:15, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Carabinieri 21:34, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 12:20, 2 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by October 9.

This subject is very good for expanding and now it is very small. I won't expand it because of my poor English. I think this article need to be expanded becaues it can be said much more about it than it is now.

Support:

1. Hołek ҉ 12:20, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 10:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by October 17.

In 2005 several important natural disasters have drawn a line that is statistically higher than normal years. There is an argument going on whether this a coincidence or not, and this proposed article would simply list the current discussion. I suggest we compile what is scientifically known about it.

Support:

1. Subramanian ^talk 10:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

• This is a fine candidate for AfD for reasons of WP:NOT: "Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought". Unless, that is, there are some very solid statistical and scientific references to back this up, which I do not see listed on the page. Sorry. :) — RJH
• This sounds more like original research to me. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-10-12 16:43
• Aside from the fact that, statistically, 2005 has NOT been an abnormal year (just because the media reports a lot does not mean there is a statistical significance), this is original research. Batmanand 17:13, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 15:10, 14 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by October 21.

This is a medical phenomenon known to most people, yet the article is very short (just an average-size stub)

Support:

1. Carabinieri 15:10, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Waltwe 20:03, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. AnyFile 20:24, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 19:53, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 17:23, 14 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by October 21.

Paul Kirchhof raised quite a bit of attention in the German news during the election campaign this year.

Support:

1. Carabinieri 17:23, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 05:22, 15 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by October 22.

Not labelled as a stub, but it is. A huge topic that deserves a much better article than this.

Support:

1. ♥purplefeltangel ^(talk) ♥ ^(contribs) 05:22, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. AnyFile 17:02, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 05:31, 15 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 22nd October 2005.

currently very short article on a subject of great importance in history of art, there are already several comments on the talk page from readers feeling there should be more content.

Support:

1. bodnotbod 05:31, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

.

Nominated on 01:16, 17 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by October 23.

Diminutive article in regard of the subject to cover. Includes very little material on how this mythology interact with Islamic mythology. There is also no ovious links between the subject and several "see also"s

Support:

1. Circeus 01:16, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Battle Ape 00:32, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. CG 15:57, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. hdstubbs

---

Nominated on 13:52, 17 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 24 October.

Considering the depth and splendor of Western Literature, from Shakespeare to Voltaire and Twain to Kafka, it's sad that we've managed only a stub for this important and fascinating topic.

Support:

1. Pyro19 13:52, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. -- SoothinR 20:34, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
3. zafiroblue05 | Talk 07:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 18:59, 17 October 2005 (UTC); needs 6 votes by 31 October.

This article is woefully inadequate, and the highways are very important to Mexican trade and transportation. The expressways of China articles are much better, and I wish the same could happen to these articles.

Support:

1. Weirdperson11 18:59, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 19:53, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. --05:19, 29 October 2005 (UTC) It is a little late, sorry... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rschen7754 (talk • contribs) 05:18, 29 October 2005

---

Nominated on 14:40, 20 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 27 October, 2005.

Article needs expanding in history of the trade, tools used, different methods used (Halal butchers, etc). It would be a great shame to see it remain as a stub.

Support:

1. GeeJo _{(t) (c)} 14:40, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 02:19, 21 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 28 October 2005.

This is an important job in the US and should be improved.

Support:

1. EdwinHJ Talk02:19, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. As an election judge in Maryland, I support this. :) -James Howard (talk/web) 16:33, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on October 23; needs 3 votes by October 30.

This could use some expansion.

Support:

1. --Revolución (talk) 23:49, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. -- Nanahuatzin 00:33, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 16:20, 12 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by October 19.

Nothing at all. Not even a Category:Armenian literature. One of the few blanks left at Literature#Literature by country, language, or cultural group. I'll try to add a short stub, but this definitely needs something more to it.

Support:

1. BRIAN0918 • 2005-10-12 16:20
2. Gareth Hughes 14:15, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. GhostGirl 01:53, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. --Revolución (talk) 20:18, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 20:36, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Darwinek 17:06, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 17:44, 4 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 11 November.

Small

Support:

1. Wonderfool t(c) 17:44, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. More bags! --Yodakii 15:54, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. —Jwanders^Talk 20:07, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 23:10, 9 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by November 16, 2005.

Its the age we live in now.

Support:

1. Tarret 23:10, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Zoso 13:38, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 12:49, 8 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 8 November.

could be much longer, and not just about team sports

Support:

1. Astrokey44 12:49, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Phoenix2 04:29, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 23:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 3 November 2005.

This article is on the largest underground chamber in the world! It deserves a better article, but my expertise in the subject is limited & I cannot complete what some people have requested of the article...

Support:

1. Spawn Man 23:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Lady BlahDeBlah 23:05, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

.

Nominated on 01:01, 13 October 2005 (UTC); needs 9 votes by 3 November.

This is really important in relation to the activity of various language versions of Wikipedia.

Support:

1. Djbaniel 01:01, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. I've changed th name and tidied it a bit, but this is an important article. --Gareth Hughes 14:33, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Waltwe 16:42, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. AnyFile 20:24, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Dragondrow 17:56, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. HereToHelp (talk) 01:55, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Tobb 07:08, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. on2see I've got to agree, it's not very informational, just has... numbers... A little more information on the topic? 6:37 PM, 7 November 2005 (EST)
9. Pyro19 10:00, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. ZeWrestler ^Talk 21:04, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
11. Interesting and currently topical. the wub "?!" 11:23, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
12. Third 23:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC) Interesting topic, needs more info in addition to statistics[reply]
13. Tothebarricades 07:36, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 18:20, 24 October 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 31 October.

This is an important geographical feature, which exists at the base of many mountains. This article doesn't even exist, a shame for such an important geographical feature.

• A salt flat is the same thing as a playa, right? We already have an article on the subject. Rhobite 02:37, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support:

1. 24.62.31.38 18:20, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Weirdperson11 21:44, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on October 24; needs 12 votes by November 21

Surely 40,187,486 people must communicate somehow.

Support:

1. 142 languages, 0 bytes. BRIAN0918 • 2005-10-24 15:45
2. --Revolución (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Great topic, and embarrassing that we don't even have a stub there.Dvyost 04:52, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
   • Well, there's no Culture of Sudan either. I guess if they can't communicate, they can't spread ideas. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-10-25 05:39
4. Darwinek 17:07, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 14:20, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Now here's a worthy topic. I'll try to help out. — mark ✎ 15:13, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Yes, we've got (albeit short) articles on fictional languages; why not improve articles on 'real' ones? Surely the novels and movies whence they come have a shorter history than Sudan! Moonstone 05:29, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. I agree, it would help lots of people like me who are working on WikiProject LanguagesAleksei 10:23, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. Astrokey44 23:47, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. Melaen 22:19, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
11. I believe that in concurrence with the developed state of language coverage in other areas of the world featured on this site, this article, and most other African language articles at that, should be made much more thorough. D'relex 03:01, 13 November 2005 (UTC)D'relex[reply]

---

Nominated on 20:05, 1 November 2005 (UTC); needs 9 votes by November 22.

Military histories seem to be COTW's strong point. How about this red link? — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-1 20:05

Support:

1. BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-1 20:05
2. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 14:21, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. I can contribute some on modern events. - BanyanTree 15:54, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Smmurphy 18:18, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Gringo300 07:43, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Svest 08:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 15:29, 2 November 2005 (UTC); needs 2 votes by 9 November.

Wikipedia does not have an article on Gender Equality. I spotted this on redirects for deletion. This article has so much scope, it could talk about feminism and the woman's right to vote, the Fathers 4 Justice campaign, and even transgender rights. But not having an article on Gender equality is shocking.

Support:

1. Hahnchen 15:29, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Sum0 22:59, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Anon 21:44, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Third 23:14, 20 November 2005 (UTC) I agree; wide scope but is definitely needed.[reply]
5. --Revolución (talk) 04:07, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 18:53, 7 November 2005 (UTC); needs 6 votes by November 21, 2005.

This is an increasingly important topic, especially as the international debate over internet governance heats up. Many countries are challenging ICANN's U.S. government-designated control over Internet governance. There is a good article at Foreign Affairs about a bit of the history, and Zonk over at Slashdot has posted a number of articles about the issue. Searching Google News will also lead to a trove of source material. An article at the Reg also contains good info. It should be quite easy to pull together a comprehensive well-referenced article on Internet governance history and the current issues.

Support:

1. —thames 18:53, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. ZeWrestler ^Talk 21:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. splot 14:03, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Has been all over the news recently, current article simply says "Internet governance has been a heated issue between many different nations." I would expect such a topic to be where Wikipedia excels. the wub "?!" 11:28, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

`

---

70.48.74.180 02:30, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated on 20:59, 7 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by November 14 2005.

This is a huge topic, covering many different types of professions. It could include the history of manual labor, the psychology associated with it, sociology, etc. But it's a puny stub right now.

Support:

1. – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 20:59, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Ynhockey 22:47, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 21:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 14 November.

Important geographic theme, and many people live in satellite towns, such as suburbs, but it is a puny stub, not updated in monthes.

Support:

1. Weirdperson11 21:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Satellite city doesnt have much either. should be more than that Astrokey44 12:11, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Jwanders^Talk 20:08, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 23:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by date in seven days.

article about a frequently used "stock character" currently only a redirect to the book Girl Heroes

Support:

1. Melaen 23:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Support

1. JenicaS 14:21, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 20:15, 13 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by November 21st, 2005.

While it's currently more than a stub, there's a lot more that could be said and what information that is there is badly organised.

Support:

1. Jwanders^Talk 20:15, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Though it might be better suited to AID the wub "?!" 19:34, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. --Revolución (talk) 04:06, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 18:04, 14 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by October 21st.

The world's most famous beer has an article that is no more than a simple stub? I'm sure that we could say a whole lot more about this, rather splendid, beer.

Support:

1. SoothingR^(pour) 18:04, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Carolaman 14:47, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 21:51, 16 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 23rd November.

A horribly low amount of information: could be split up maybe? But logic needs improving.

Support:

1. 62.3.229.146 21:51, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Zoso 16:10, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• Not a stub. --Tothebarricades 07:37, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 22:11, 11 November 2005 (UTC); needs 6 votes November 25.

needs improving, important topic but it's only a little stub

Support:

1. Melaen 22:11, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Very good idea. You've got my strong support there. Peter S. 22:21, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. splot 14:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. jaredwf 08:33, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Count me in. Koveras 21:59, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 22:11, 18 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 25 November.

Certainly deserves a better article as a popular food in North Africa and the Near East.

Support:

1. Wackymacs 22:11, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Aroberts 23:26, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 20:55, 13 November 2005 (UTC); needs 6 votes by 28 November, 2005.

It's an extensive topic, but we only have a stub, which is full of mistakes - Bulgarian literature does not begin in the 18th century, but rather 8 or 9 centuries before this date. The whole branch of medieval Old Bulgarian literature of the Preslav and Ohrid Literary Schools is not mentioned at all. It has many other inaccuracies too, see for yourself.

Support:

1. → Тодор Божинов / Todor Bozhinov _{→ Talk} 20:55, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Alinor 18:00, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Tothebarricades 07:23, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. --Revolución (talk) 04:06, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 01:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC); needs 6 votes by 29 November 2005.

A key life process, and something I imagine many, many people look up on Wikipedia. Yet, it's been on cleanup for over a year, and is - well- very short. I have no interest in science articles, but this must surely be improved soon.

Support:

1. Hedley 01:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. the wub "?!" 11:33, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Pyro19 06:29, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Melaen 17:08, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Gflores ^Talk 16:56, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• Isn't this a bit broad? I'm sure most of the infomation we could add is covered in articles on respiration. --Tothebarricades 07:49, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 16:52, 28 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 5th December 2005.

This article is of a news programme made by BBC News for the digital channel BBC Three. It is a good idea for a news show and the article could really do with lots of users working on it. Please choose it! :)

Support:

1. Wikiwoohoo 16:52, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Ho Ho Ho!)} 10:42, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated at 07:45, 24 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 1 December.

A very important field of study, which the article admits is "huge," but as of now fails to explore. --Tothebarricades 07:45, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1. karmafist 16:18, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. File Éireann 20:00, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 17:40, 25 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 2 December.

It should be one of the greatest articles.

Support:

1. PepperIT 17:40, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Wackymacs 17:03, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

1. This article is not eligible for COTW as its a large article already. I recommend it be moved to Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive for which its eligible. IF no one objects, I will move it in seven days.--File Éireann 19:57, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated 19:07, 26 November 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 3 December.

Essential importance in relation to the activity of various language editions of Wikipedia.

Support:

1. Djbaniel 19:07, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Ynhockey 14:22, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Wasn't this article just recently pruned? --ZeWrestler ^Talk 02:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's no rule stating that you aren't allowed to renominate failed articles, but I agree it could get annoying if an article kept on getting nominated as soon as it failed. Maybe this is a discussion for wikipedia talk:collaboration of the week. Talrias (t | e | c) 14:51, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 00:48, 3 December 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by December 10.

Well-reference bit of lore that could be fun and easy to do.

Support:

1. User:Davodd 00:48, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 21:50, 5 December 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 12 December.

An important science category with very little coverage. The Oceanography page is only somewhat better. (Note that this was nominated on the Science CotW page and had good support, but that forum has since become inactive.) Thanks. :)

Support:

1. RJH 21:50, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Cyde Weys _talk^contribs 07:42, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 22:31, 27 November 2005 (UTC); needs 6 votes by 11 December.

Juno is the queen of the Roman gods, though (similar to many other mythological articles) she only has a stub. Also note that Juno is somewhat different than her Greek counterpart Hera, like the difference between Cronos and Saturn

Support:

1. TBC 22:31, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. ZeWrestler ^Talk 17:43, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Davodd 00:54, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. --kralahome 06:29, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• I've just done a report on her son Mars for my mythology class, so after reading the various other references in to her, i can see that this article needs help. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 17:43, 30 November 2005 (UTC) ΌόΎύΏώΑαΓγΔδ[reply]

---

Nominated on 19:32, 14 November 2005 (UTC); needs 12 votes by 12 December.

One of the most popular books of the 20th century, and possibly the most important and influential popular science book ever written. Currently a ridiculously short stub.

Support:

1. the wub "?!" 19:32, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Definitely a very important book - Zoso 16:09, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. --The1exile 16:19, 20 November 2005 (UTC) Certainly an important article[reply]
4. --Mr. Dude ^{†@£К ║ Çøת†яĭβü†ĬŎИ} 18:10, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Pyro19 15:16, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Ehouk1 12:38, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Wow. No Parking 22:25, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. --Alfakim 01:29, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
9. -- cobalt 03:10, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. Witty lama 22:47, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 22:12, 1 December 2005 (UTC); needs 6 votes by December 15.

it should be ampliated

Support:

1. Melaen 22:12, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. User:Davodd 00:42, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. User: Genghis khan 6:43, 15 January 2006(UTC)

---

.

Nominated on 20:49, 2 December 2005 (UTC); needs 6 votes by December 16.

Surely this appeals to sports fans! Created it a little while ago but would like others to help me out in creating it properly

Support:

1. Wikiwoohoo 20:49, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. I'm not a sports fan, but there's no reason this shouldn't be almost as comprehensive as BBC News MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 12:00, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. I've tried to expand it a bit, but the article has a lot more potential. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Ho Ho Ho!)} 17:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 23:40, 4 December 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by December 11.

Society is one of the eight top-level categories under which all the other pages are organized. But right now the description page is a relatively brief work that is tagged as in need of attention. It could be significantly expanded, improved and made much more engaging. Thanks.

Support:

1. RJH 23:40, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• Well, it's not really a stub - might I recomment the Article Improvement Drive instead? Talrias (t | e | c) 23:45, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay RJH

---

Nominated on 07:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by December 16.

He's apparently a very important man in the field of landscape architecture but he doesn't even have his own article.

Support:

1. Cyde Weys [u] [t] [c] 07:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Walkerma 21:08, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 17:21, 15 December 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 22 December.

This is the world's oldest existing metal type printed book. Unesco's prize Memory of the World is also named Jijki after this book. Article we have at this moment is not even wikified.

Support:

1. Avala 17:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Melaen 18:08, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 23:35, 10 December 2005 (UTC); needs 6 votes by 24 December.

This park was once the equivalent of what Disneyworld is today, and it was visited by a number of important celebrities of the day. Yet, there's only two paragraphs written about it. There is a lot of information to be found about the park and it shouldn't be difficult to do some research.

Support:

1. Quintin3265 23:35, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Juppiter 01:07, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. ike9898 15:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. NeoJustin 02:51, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 15:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by December 20, 2005.

Africus was a Roman god of wind. I could accept that as being a stub, but seeing as the subject of this article is directly responsible for the name which the continent of Africa received, I'm convinced that this article should be thoroughly expanded.

Support:

1. ---- Astrokey44|talk 12:30, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I see absolutely no reason to spend any time at all working on such an amazingly trivial topic. For one thing, most experts agree that the god "Africus" probably isn't the source of the name "Africa" (or at least not the original source), since there are many other noteworthy etymological possibilities. Second of all, what makes you think that there is much existing information about this god beyond what we currently have? "Africus was the god of the southwest (storm-rain) wind. He was depicted as wet and surrounded by clouds." That seems to be just about the sum of information that remains on this extremely minor Roman god. Rather than bothering with the sort of obscure, minimal trivia that doesn't really teach us anything about the world and its history but is just an amusing tidbit to point out at parties, why not nominate for CotW one of the thousands of Africa articles that is a truly vital and integral aspect of the history of Africa? Africa would be no different if it was called a different name, but many other aspects of the many African cultures have had a profound and lasting impact. Or at least consider working on a different god, one with more substantial information lacking. For example, the Prometheus and Atlas (mythology) articles are surprisingly short, considering their enormous importance.
• If anything, Africus doesn't need to be expanded—he needs to be merged into a general article on the Roman wind gods, since there's so little noteworthy information on them all: Favonius (west wind—largely a disambig), Aquilo (north wind—currently merged into his Greek equivalent), Vulturnus (west wind—currently merged with Greek), Auster (south wind—currently an airplane), Africus (south-west wind), Corus (north-west wind—currently a disambig), etc. That, or he needs to be merged with Lips, the Greek south-west wind, who there is similarly very little information on - see Tower of the Winds for all the Greek versions. Regardless, this collab seems kind of futile and aimless. -Silence 05:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• After reading other coments, I hereby revoke my voteYellowmellow45 13:20, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• And so do I. -- SoothingR^(pour) 14:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: I have now merged this article, and all other Roman and Greek wind deities, into a new Anemoi article, based on a brief discussion on Talk:Zephyrus. If no one objects, Africus, and all the other Anemoi/Venti pages, will now become redirects to that page. However, please feel free to expand on any portion of the Anemoi article which you wish to contribute to, including the paragraph on Africus/Lips in the Minor winds section; there's plenty of room to expand on what we currently have, this merge is merely designed to facilitate consistency and to centralize our efforts to improve and expand on classical wind-god coverage. Hope to see ya there! -Silence 18:36, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 13:24, 17 December 2005 (UTC); needs 6 votes by December 31.

A huge activity, from BitTorrent to your local market. I was in Indonesia recently, and saw the huge extent to which this goes.

Support:

1. Ludraman 13:24, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Webster100 01:01, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. ZeWrestler ^Talk 22:35, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Sceptre ^(Talk) 14:16, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Take a look at Copyright infringement of audio-visual works. Talrias (t | e | c) 16:15, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 19:25, 18 December 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 25 December.

This is an important article stub that really needs the help of a lot of different experts who can fill in information for each of the regions. It would especially benefit from being a Collaboration of the Week article, as it is difficult to normally gather people with divergent interests to help summarize their region of expertise.

Support:

1. Culturesoftheworld 19:25, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Avala 16:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• I have speedy deleted this article because it consisted of nothing but headers.--Sean|Black 19:59, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 06:44, 25 December 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by 31 Dec 2005.

Many pages redirect to this page and it has many other inbound links. Important psychological topic.

Support:

1. kralahome 06:44, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Ted 22:10, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. Alex--69.73.10.228 06:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Decline:

1. 69.109.182.125 03:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
2. Epimetreus 22:19, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

Possibly once there's more information, and in particular, some references. Epimetreus 22:19, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 08:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by January 4.

The Chemical Revolution is one of the Big Ideas in the history of science; along with the Copernican Revolution and the Einsteinian Revolution, it was one of the few paradigmatic events on which the whole concept of paradigm shifts/scientific revolutions was based. Until a few hours ago, it didn't even have a stub. There isn't even anything about it in history of chemistry, but it definitely deserves its own (long, feature-standard) article.

Support:

1. ragesoss 08:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

• I oppose this ridiculous nomination. I specialized in the history of science as an undergraduate and no one in that field uses this term when describing the history of chemistry. "Chemical Revolution" smells too much of original research and may violate Wikipedia's No original research policy. Some admin delete this article immediately, please! --Coolcaesar 21:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just do a quick Google of it. Current historians of science don't really use the term "revolution" at all, and generally try to distance themselves from Kuhn because the field has moved past that, but "chemical revolution" is still a term that has a specific meaning and a lot of material on it, and it absolutely should be in Wikipedia. There is a lengthy Brittanica section on the chemical revolution within 'Lavoisier' and bits about it in several others, BTW.--ragesoss 23:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Couldn't this topic be conflated with the history of chemistry article, and the later be nominated instead? The history article does appear to be in need of some expansion. — RJH 19:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, that article could use some major expansion as well. But it's too long to qualify for COTW, isn't it?--ragesoss 23:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yup, ergo Article Improvement Drive would be my suggestion. :) — RJH 21:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for removal:

Not enough votes.--Urthogie 19:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 16:25, 18 December 2005 (UTC); needs 9 votes by January 8.

Is quite short

Support:

1. Dangherous 16:25, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. Jiang 03:48, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. NeoJustin 04:45, December 25, 2005 (UTC)
4. Cernen 09:14, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Bastique 14:41, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Lapsed Pacifist 22:22, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. 172 05:46, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. Aaronwinborn 03:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: Probably because there isn't any? Cernen

• Isn't any? It's called "hypernationalism" since 2001. ℬastique▼^parℓer♥^voir♑ 14:41, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• It's not a stub..isnt the purpose of COtW to improve past stub status?--Urthogie 16:28, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Urthogie is right. I call for a disqualification of this article..it's simply too long for COTW.SoothingR 07:02, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Result: From the Wikipedia:Collaborations of the Week: This project aims to fill holes in Wikipedia, so only non-existent articles, or stubs may be nominated. While it is true that we can ignore all of wikipedia's rules, there is no rule that you have to use the collaboration of the week to make your article better. If its going to go on this it has to follow the rules of the process. I suggest you tag it cleanup or expansion. Removing it. Thanks, --Urthogie 17:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 12:09, 5 December 2005 (UTC); needs 12 votes by January 2.

This article is incredibly bare, considering the importance of this industry. Could be improved with history and economy sections, and information on the industry's role in various countries.

Support:

1. Rampart 12:09, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. ike9898 20:59, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Melaen 00:24, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Jcmaco 00:52, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Ludraman 13:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Webster100 16:52, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Trekphiler 05:25, 19 December 2005 (UTC) For a start, I've heard, in the 1870s, Mike Cudahy intro refridgeration.[reply]
8. JHMM13 (T | C) 07:22, 25 December 2005 (UTC) Detailed references to Upton Sinclair might also be interesting..[reply]
9. Fenice 13:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
10. --Coolcaesar 21:15, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for removal:

Not enough votes.--Urthogie 19:06, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 18:05, 5 December 2005 (UTC); needs 12 votes by January 2.

the article for this genre of anthropological study should be much bigger

Support:

1. Soul assassin 18:05, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. RexNL 19:01, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
3. Pruneau 00:34, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
4. Bruxism 01:22, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
5. Melaen 00:25, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
6. Joey Roe 15:47, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
7. Fenice 13:47, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
8. NeoJustin 01:08, December 27, 2005 (UTC)
9. Neutrality^talk 23:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nominated on 15:31, 26 December 2005 (UTC); needs 3 votes by January 2.

Three sentences and some lists! An encyclopedia should have more on this topic.

Support:

1. Fenice 15:31, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
2. NeoJustin 17:43, January 2, 2005 (UTC)

Comments:

• We do have more on this topic: pages and pages on it. It's just all been moved to the subpages of this article (Old Latin, Classical Latin, Vulgar Latin, Medieval Latin, Humanist Latin, New Latin, etc.) and no one's taken the time to summarize it appropriately on the main page yet (though it is summarized quite well on Culture of ancient Rome#Literature, which you could certainly use as a nice starting place for the Literature article).
• Personally, I just started working on the "Latin literature" series of articles a few days ago, and planned to tackle this article very soon. But despite that, I don't think this article is a very good choice at all for CotW: there are dozens of other Ancient Rome-related Wikipedia articles that are much worse off than this one, like Roman bridge (compare it to its remarkably complete sister article, Roman road), Roman art, Roman music (linked to in several places, but doesn't exist yet), Roman architecture, and Rome itself! (Yes, Rome is a stub. Don't let the bloated lists, stub sections, and pretty pictures fool you.) The whole Roman mythology series could also use a heck of a lot of tidying up to bring it up to par with its Greek counterpart, as could History of Rome, and, hell, Latin could use a little expansion too, though not on CotW since it's no stub. I may support this article in a few days, but I still feel it isn't the ideal choice and picking it out of all the Rome-related articles was a very hasty move. Ancient Rome was the CotW only a few weeks ago and is still quite lacking in dozens of areas itself: for example, no discussion of Roman numerals, the Roman calendar, the status of women, Roman games and festivals, nomina, etc. But oh well. -Silence 15:56, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lots of subarticles already exist, as your listing above shows. And that is exactly why I think it is doable as a COTW - much of the work is writing summaries. All the other topics you are mentioning are worthy projects too, but shouldn't an encyclopedia have (good) articles on the most important Classical education topics first?--Fenice 22:08, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for removal:

Not enough votes.--Urthogie 19:08, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---