Talk:Wikipedia: Difference between revisions
JTSchreiber (talk | contribs) →Section Moves: Reply |
No edit summary |
||
Line 124: | Line 124: | ||
:''Moved to [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Countries]]'' |
:''Moved to [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Countries]]'' |
||
== Porn Money == |
|||
Why no mention that Wikipedia was founded with porn money? Seems like an important part of its history. |
|||
== Goethe quotation == |
== Goethe quotation == |
Revision as of 00:27, 26 July 2011
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikipedia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25Auto-archiving period: 7 days ![]() |
Template:Wikipedia talk notice
![]() | This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Wikipedia is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | Wikipedia has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
![]() | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
![]() | Wikipedia Reference Desk was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 27 February 2010 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Wikipedia. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
![]() | The contents of the Wikipedia community page were merged into Wikipedia. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
|
Index
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 8 sections are present. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikipedia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25Auto-archiving period: 7 days ![]() |
Countries
Porn Money
Why no mention that Wikipedia was founded with porn money? Seems like an important part of its history.
Goethe quotation
I've just removed the following from the section on editing:
Here, as in other human endeavours, it is evident that the active attention of many, when concentrated on one point, produces excellence.
— Goethe, The Experiment as Mediator between Subject and Object, 1772
"Here" was of course not referring to Wikipedia. Such an inclusion seems highly biased towards the idea that the whole Wikipedia project produces excellence. If this quotation has inspired or guided the founders or developers of Wikipedia (and why wouldn't it?) then that should be cited and included as part of the article. If not, it shouldn't be there. Opera hat (talk) 22:36, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Illistrations
It would be worth having at least a small section on Wikipedia's logo and branding. --Dweller (talk) 12:46, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
--Sorry I'm so new to this. I think it would be better to qualify the logo's caption using the word "several" or "various." I'm not sure it's accurate to say the logo includes glyphs from "many" different forms of writing. Wishelephant (talk) 03:42, 20 July 2011 (UTC)Wishelephant
Who draws the logos and everything for this stuff? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jubblybubblyboy (talk • contribs) 18:44, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Sentence on Articles Containing Errors Contains an Error
"This means that an article may contain contain errors, misguided contributions, advocacy, or even patent nonsense."
I suppose this sentence is proof that this sentence is true? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoater P (talk • contribs) 04:06, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I removed the duplicated duplicated word. -- JTSchreiber (talk) 05:02, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. Thanks. Stoater P (talk) 18:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Edit request from 122.168.157.244, 8 June 2011
![]() | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
122.168.157.244 (talk) 13:34, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- You've initiated the procedure for requesting an edit, but haven't stated what edit you'd like made. I've closed this request, but you're welcome to reactivate it and request an edit. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 16:13, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- Likely troll. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.76.50 (talk) 17:01, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
New York Times compares volunteers who worked on the original Oxford English Dictionary to "Wikipedians"
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/magazine/11wwln-medium-t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Let’s go back. As lexicography geeks know well, Oxford’s magnum opus appeared in 10 volumes in 1928, after some 70 years of work by generations of editors and about 2,000 volunteers. (The volunteers displayed much the same gratis fanaticism of today’s Wikipedians.) A supplement with new words appeared in 1933, with additional supplements showing up at regular intervals between 1972 and 1986; in 1989 the whole dictionary was published anew in 20 volumes that collated the ’33 edition and its supplements. Since virtually the day that that last biggie was published, Oxford University Press has been overhauling and revising entries in the dictionary and adding many more. (Oh, “mullet,” “carbo-load,” “six-pack,” “hazmat,” “pole dancing,” “doh!” — what would we do without you?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.248.238.172 (talk) 16:14, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
speedy deletion
I don't understand why Wikipedia has an article about itself. Would an encyclopedia have an article about itself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.1.139.211 (talk) 22:01, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is notable by Wikipedia's standards, this is why it has an article. I cannot speak for other encyclopaedias, but Wikipedia is fairly unique in its scope. Rehevkor ✉ 22:32, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- [2] Hot Stop talk-contribs 13:19, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- In addition, we do have articles on other notable encyclopedias, so we are not biased. Cbrittain10 (talk) 23:07, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Section Moves
The entire sections of Sexual Content and Plagiarism could be moved into Criticisms of Wikipedia, what do you think? Cbrittain10 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:17, 23 July 2011 (UTC).
- Criticism of Wikipedia is currently a disambiguation page, not an article, so content cannot be moved there. Are you proposing that Criticism of Wikipedia be converted back into an article? -- JTSchreiber (talk) 05:26, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Automatic Bot archiving
this talk page is pretty active, may I set up automatic archiving of this page?
{{User:MiszaBot/config | algo = old(7d) | archive = User talk:Example/Archives/%(year)d/%(monthname)s }}
- GA-Class Wikipedia articles
- Top-importance Wikipedia articles
- WikiProject Wikipedia articles
- GA-Class Websites articles
- Top-importance Websites articles
- GA-Class Websites articles of Top-importance
- GA-Class Computing articles
- Mid-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- All Websites articles
- GA-Class Internet culture articles
- High-importance Internet culture articles
- WikiProject Internet culture articles
- Wikipedia former featured articles
- Wikipedia good articles
- Engineering and technology good articles
- Old requests for peer review
- Wikipedia pages referenced by the press
- Wikipedia pages with to-do lists
- Talk pages cleaned up by the Talk Page Cleanup Crew