Wikipedia talk:Amnesia test

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Essays
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Essays, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.
 Low  This page has been rated as Low-impact on the project's impact scale.


Now, I actually like this idea especially "forget everything you know". It's a good point especially in keeping it POV. The end sorta sounds like doublethink though doesn't it? :) Lsjzl 19:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree with you here. --Siva1979Talk to me 04:47, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Sounds worth a 'see also' link then :-) --Sam Blanning(talk) 11:30, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I really like this. I want to tell people "Write what you don't know!" because articles have to be verifiable by people without expert knowledge. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 21:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

inappropriate shortcut: WP:AT clashes with the Attribution policy (proposal)[edit]

I wonder how popular this essay is. If it's not as hot as the Attribution policy (proposal), it should not be given a shortcut which is easily confused with that policy, namely WP:AT. I have found myself referring people to this essay to make a point about the Attribution policy (proposal). This makes my arguments confusing, to say the least. Itayb 08:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it's fine the way it is. Wikipedia:ATTribution gets WP:ATT and Wikipedia:Amnesia Test gets WP:AT. I think that the disambiguation link at the top is satisfactory. WODUP 07:32, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


I had never stumbled on this before today. I understand the good-faith sentiment behind it, but I'm afraid I disagree with it very strongly. Many of our NPOV violations happen unintentionally because editors do not have enough knowledge of a subject matter to know the difference between a reliable and an unreliable source within a given field, or the definition of undue weight as regards to a particular topic. We always need people with expertise, and we always value that expertise. Chick Bowen 04:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)