Tradition was a core article, and had been selected for v. 0.5 of Wikipedia:Version 1.0. Maybe we should try to select articles that are (or should be) targets for Wikipedia:Version 1.0, as Theatre is. -- Donald Albury 14:54, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This seems like an excellent choice. Better defined than the last one, although also has more content already (a lot of which could probably be sourced pretty easily). And I agree focusing on core and/or vital articles, at least most of the time.--ragesoss (talk) 01:04, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Broad enough to benefit most from collaboration. sonia♫ 03:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Personal life was the topic of 25 February 2011's Editing Fridays
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Rational Since Obsessive Compulsive Disorder looks good, I figured that this would be a good ironic article to edit. Besides, it does need inline citations and could always use expansion.
Oooh, I support this one too. This was what I was going to suggest myself, if there weren't any other suggestions.--ragesoss (talk) 03:54, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rationale One of the first skyscrapers ever built, this building is a National Historic Landmark and is in sore need of attention; this stub is rated top-importance for WikiProject Architecture and there's a good volume of sources out there.
I am picking this article due to its narrow scope. Our past attempts at broad articles have fallen on its face --Guerillero | My Talk 17:21, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rational Terribly underdeveloped and directly relevant to program (could invite professors to participate.)
Support
Comment
Maybe we should wait until all the classes are online and the professors understand contributing a little better, Sadads (talk) 23:00, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's true, if we can get professors and/or students to join in, it would be great. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 04:33, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This one would be best left off a couple of weeks, I think, to get the classes involved and have a massive collaboration :) sonia♫ 03:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To get a ton of classes involved in a project might result in chaos if there is no plan. Maybe each class could expand a section or something but a mass rush to edit the article will kill a lot of spirits if not done properly. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:21, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rationale: severely undercovered history article with fair amount of coverage in English. Numerous scholarly discussions of it, and certainly plenty of text books
