This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Australia: Brisbane WikiProject Brisbane is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia This page is supported by the Brisbane task force.

Archives

2006–2007 2008–2011

In care other editors weren't aware ourbrisbane.com has closed. There are now a considerable number of dead links because of that, so if you see such a link be sure to remove it. - Shiftchange (talk) 07:24, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, you beat me to it. this is a better link btw to show the 291 links we have to the site. The site is quite literally gone - its front page states: "The ourbrisbane.com website closed 30 June 2011. You can still find the best of what our great city has to offer with the help of some sites below." Orderinchaos 21:48, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is archived on Internet Archive. I can't find it in PANDORA. I hope it is in there. If not, I wonder if we could talk to the BCC and ask them to submit it to PANDORA before they delete it. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 07:12, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are 291 occurrences on en.WP and one on Commons. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 07:20, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The question was last asked in 2008 — after looking at the archives, and noting that the project is likely incapable of performing maintenance tasks such as that noted above, I think this WikiProject should be converted into a taskforce of WikiProject Queensland, as it seems in practice that there's an overlap in scope and participants. The Western Australian project similarly absorbed WP:PERTH some years ago, and all that's happened in practice is that the same group of people who were in both projects are in one, and still working on Perth articles. Orderinchaos 22:13, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes its been very quiet for ages around here. A conversion to a taskforce of WikiProject Queensland would be best. - Shiftchange (talk) 03:09, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The same can be said for Wikipedia:WikiProject Sydney. OTOH Wikipedia:WikiProject Melbourne seems to be quite active. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 07:05, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Second that. Most capital city projects seem to have died out with contributors moving on to other things, or is still active but focusing on other topics. Sb617 (Talk) 15:15, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:King George Square, Brisbane#Requested move may be of interest to members of this project. Jenks24 (talk) 17:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi folks - anyone with any interest - there is a new Australian project Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian Roads - please have a look. sats 02:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Today in Suncorp Stadium, more than 7000 musicians gathered together and played a medley of pieces, setting a new world record. It was a fantastic atmosphere and congratulations to everyone who participated! There's probably at least one other person on here who went, so feel free to use this userbox if you wish to show your support.

—Thanks! DarkToonLink^Heyaah! 07:40, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Our first Australian conference for Wikipedians/Wikimedians will be held 3-5 October 2015. Organised by Wikimedia Australia, there will be a 2-day conference (Saturday 3 October and Sunday 4 October) with an optional 3rd day (Monday 5 October) for specialist topics (unconference discussions, training sessions, etc). The venue is the State Library of Queensland in Brisbane. So put those dates in your diary! Note: Monday is a public holiday is some states but not others. Read about it here: WikiConference Australia 2015

As part of that page, there are now sections for you to:

• indicate your interest in possibly attending the conference (this is not a binding commitment, of course)
• add suggestions for topics to include in the conference: what you would like to hear/discuss (again, there is no commit to you presenting/organising that topic, although it’s great if you are willing to do so), or indicate your enthusiasm for any existing topic on the list by adding a note of support underneath it

It would really help our planning if you could let us know about possible attendance and the kind of topics that would make you want to come. If you don’t want to express your views on-wiki, please email me at kerry.raymond@wikimedia.org.au or committee@wikimedia.org.au

We are hoping to have travel subsidies available to assist active Australasian Wikipedians to attend the conference, although we are not currently in a position to provide details, but be assured we are doing everything we can to make it possible for active Australian Wikipedians to come to the conference. Kerry (talk) 00:17, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(timestamp may not be accurate) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Another Believer (talk • contribs) 15:13, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Come along! Kerry (talk) 20:31, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	Brisbane Meetup Next: To be decided (watch) Last: Saturday 13 January 2018
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

I would so much like to have photo of this lovely velodrome. Can anyboldy help me? Thank you, --Nicola (talk) 19:36, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you are in or near Brisbane, please join us on Sunday 10 December 2017 any time from noon to 4pm at The Edge at the State Library of Queensland. For more details and to sign up, please go to the meetup page. See you there! Kerry (talk) 21:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

	Brisbane Meetup Next: To be decided (watch) Last: Saturday 13 January 2018
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

If you are in or near Brisbane, please join us on Saturday 13 January 2018 any time from noon to 4pm at The Edge at the State Library of Queensland. For more details and to sign up, please go to the meetup page. See you there! Kerry (talk) 05:27, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

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

The discussion about this can be found here.

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

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

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

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

So far, 84 editors have joined.

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

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

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:27, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Project members or watchers might need to heed the critique of the soon to go portal:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Abandoned_micro-portals_for_Australian_state_capitals

JarrahTree 13:27, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

We need create a Module:Location map/data/Australia Brisbane based on File:Map of Brisbane free and printable.svg to Category:Australia location map templates. Like Module:Location map/data/Australia Sydney. Who knows this? I created a module on pl.Wikipedia - pl:Moduł:Mapa/dane/Brisbane based on another map of File:Brisbane OpenStreetMap.png, unfortunately - errors in coordinates. You need a person who knows about it. Subtropical-man (✉ | en-2) 22:42, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya everyone,

New member here.

I was just wondering as it seems this project is decently active the history should be edited to make it clear that this project is still working. Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 08:42, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tomorrow and tomorrow: I don't think it is active. An active project tends to host a lot of discussions, which isn't happening here. Just because articles that relate to Brisbane may be actively edited, it doesn't mean this forum is active. If you are looking for an active project, maybe look at Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board where discussions do take place. Kerry (talk) 12:09, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I've posted some COI edit requests at Talk:TechnologyOne. Sharing in case anyone here is interested in taking a look. Thank you for any help or feedback! Mary Gaulke (talk) 15:15, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! These requests have been open since February, so chasing here in case anyone has a moment to take a look. Even just a partial response would be super helpful. Thanks again. Mary Gaulke (talk) 14:45, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Bernard Fanning for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 18:33, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

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

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:41, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]