Jump to content

Talk:Blog

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dd-b (talk | contribs) at 16:14, 3 July 2007 (Query distinction between "blog" and online magazine). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:FAOL

Microsoft Controversy -- appropriate here?

While I'm as bothered as anyone by the Microsoft blogging controversy, I was surprised to find it in this article. Why does this belong in an encyclopedia article about blogs? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.103.203.4 (talk) 21:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Agreed. No need to list every single controversy or argument that involves bloggers in the main Blog article. Why is this one in particular mentioned while excluding all the others? Kevinharder 03:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's also pointless becasue there isn't really an issue. It states that laptops were given to bloggers, and if they were journalists, it would have been illegal. It's just an irrelevant fact, and way too undetailed in the first place. Slayer425 16:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it have to be in reverse?

If someone creates a blog or journal that is not diaplayed in reverse-chronological order, why is that not considered a blog? Is there any source that says this must be true?

Furthermore - how is it possible to display entries in reverse-chronological order? That would mean one has to write the last entry first, and the first entry last. From what I have seen, blog entries made in 2007, appear in 2007. Entries made in 2008 don't appear until 2008. As the 2007 entry existed before the 2008 entry, the 2007 entry is displayed first. How do you display an entry that doesn't even exist yet?

Another conundrum - some blogs allow you to customize the display order. If I go to a blog that displays its index in descending chronological order, and change the preference to display in ascending chronological order - does it suddenly cease to be a blog?

I would say it does not. What is important about a blog is that it is "serial" and thus is a series of postings in a chronological order. Placing the newest at the top is simply a reading preference; many people read blogs in RSS readers in forward chronological order. What differentiated blogs from more ordinary browsed web sites was their serial nature, I would recommend this simpler definition.--Bradtem 03:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Change to Page

This was discussed up at the top of the page on the subject of the 'Types of Links' section, but I'm fairly certain that the article can't be complete without a mention of the importance of the group blog in the development of the blogosphere - so much so that I created a page for Collaborative Blog.

As mentioned in the article, 7 of the top 10 blogs on NZ Bear's Ecosystem are group blogs. Additionally, it would be churlish not to mention such mega-group blogs such as DailyKos somewhere in the article.

So, even if it's only in the 'See Also' section I'd appreciate it if someone with editing permission could include it.

p.s. Please feel free to visit the collaborative blog page and add any information you feel is relevant. I've been out of the game for a couple of years now, so my recent knowledge will undoubtedly be a little rusty.

Sortap 16:28, 28 January 2007 (UTC)Sortap[reply]

Blogswarm

The topic 'blogswarm' redirects to this page, yet there is no information about that phenomenon in this article. I believe the topic needs its own article, including some of the more famous blogswarms over the years. Without objection, I'll create that page, removing the redirect. Arjunasbow 00:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See also addition

I think that Bebo should be added too the See Also section as this is a quickly developing social network site.

Local teenagers in my area (New Zealand) seem to currently prefer Bebo to the other social networking pages like MySpace.

Nightkhaos 11:39, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Captain's Quarters

I think there should be a mention about Captain's Quarters. The influence it had, at least for a moment, and the legal issues that arose at the time of its involvement in the Adscam are of special interest. Or so at least when compared to other examples given in the article... --Childhood's End 20:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trimmed See Also Section

I removed a ton of links they I believed were not core to blogging. For example I removed all the social networking links, but left a link to a list of social networking sites. Let us know if you disagree with a removal. Daniel.Cardenas 16:40, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Early history

I added a note about some early history of blogs (from personal experience, but with cites of course) which may nonetheless open some questions, so I thought I would add some background reasoning here.

When Tim Berners-Lee defined the web, he designed it to include many of the media that had come before, and to this day URLs include means to access ftp servers, gopher servers, telnet sessions, sending E-mail and both USENET newsgroups and individual USENET articles. I know from both his writings and personal conversations that he considered these things to be part of the web, though they were not done in hypertext with HTML and HTTP. Thus the web log as a concept (if not the name) will predate what many people other than Berners-Lee think of as the period of the web. USENET and E-mail mailing lists were the primary forms of serial publishing on the pre-HTTP web (another key characteristic of a blog is that it's serial.) E-mail writing was part of the web, reading E-mail never became part of it until web-based E-mail readers appeared. As such, I believe the earliest blogs are found among moderated newsgroups. Most moderated newsgroups did not have the third component a blog needs (a personal editorial voice) but some did, and the earliest of these was mod.ber, so I have added a small section on it. You can still read mod.ber's archives with the link I provide. At some point there should be an article about it and Brian Redmond. I know him but only distantly, so I have not yet prepared one.--Bradtem 03:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might be wandering into the realm of original research. A key difference is that newsgroups until relatively recently (I'm thinking of deja.net which became Google Groups) did not have "persistence" in the way that blogs have archives. Plus they have a highly specialized client (the newsreader), while Web clients were always intended to be jacks-of-all-trades to begin with. --Coolcaesar 03:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
While my expertise in the area does indeed come from having participated, the fundamental details are of course cited from other sources to avoid the problem of being original research. There are a number of blogs that don't persist, so I have not considered that part of the definition of a blog, and in any event, USENET was archived, and that's why you can read the archives of mod.ber today - I linked to them. Deja News did not build the archives, those were done by others are used much later by Deja (and Google which bought it) --Bradtem 23:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "Legal Issues" Section

This section seems to be getting a little long and unfocused. Some reorganization seems to be in order. Perhaps break into a couple/few sections? Some of the entries refer more to inadvertent (negative?) consequences to blogging, rather than legal issues per se. The Ellen Simonetti entry has focussed on employee v. employer rights and responsibilities in blogging; perhaps that issue could be a separate section. Another could be something like "blogging and defamation legalities", etc. Perhaps a section, or even a new wikipedia entry, listing famous examples of blogging and consequences. Bdushaw 00:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Anyone have any examples of men who were fired for blogging about their employer and/or personal lives? Bdushaw 01:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes James Howard was fired by the Dadeland mall in Miami because of his blog. also.... According to a man living in Miami FL he invented the blog in 1982. His name is James Howard, you can view his website at www.showmeblog.com Go and see what he has to say for yourself. He is addiment that he is the worlds first "blog".

India

Remember the time when blogs were banned in India, Pakistan ? Does that need to be mentioned 122.162.58.39 09:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blogs can be many things

Somebody seems to have changed a line near the beginning of the page where it explains what blogs are. They removed the text that said that a blog can also be an online diary/journal, presumably because the person makes a distinction between online journals and blogs. However, the blogging community would seem to disagree since so many blogs *are* personal diaries. I'm not a registered user at the moment, but perhaps somebody could revert that statement? To say that blogs cannot be personal diaries is disingenuous at best. 24.96.212.167 13:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I write this the opening line of the article says "A blog is a user-generated website where entries are made in journal style and displayed in a reverse chronological order." which covers personal diaries and journals. Did you have a more specific change in mind? Gwernol 13:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This line, "Blogs provide commentary or news on a particular subject, such as food, politics, or local news." was originally "Blogs often provide commentary or news on a particular subject, such as food, politics, or local news; some function as more personal online diaries." It was changed this morning. That's the change I was looking to be reverted. 24.96.212.167 13:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, looks like it was reverted by Rador. So hopefully it stays that way. :) 24.96.212.167 14:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been here recently, but a definition I was happy with a long time ago is gone and now it says this: "A blog (short for web log) is a user-generated website where entries are made in journal style and displayed in a reverse chronological order."

I would suggest modifying it to look lilke this:

"A blog (short for web log) is a website where entries are displayed in reverse chronological order."

user-generated website - The website might not always be user generated, but the content might be.

journal style - Doesn't have to be... Stevegarfield 17:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blogging attracts abuse.

Today in the LA Times:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-internet31mar31,0,4064392.story?coll=la-home-headlines

The unfortunate fear factor - a successful blogger may attract kooks, or at least those that would use fear to stifle the bloggers dialog. This would seem to be a product of the anonymity element of the blogging process. 24.41.39.124 07:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Livejournal is blogging software?

Hi

The following paragraph has confused me slightly:

"Blogs can be hosted by dedicated blog hosting services, or they can be run using blog software, such as WordPress, Movable Type, blogger or LiveJournal, or on regular web hosting services, such as DreamHost."

I was not aware LiveJournal was blogging software (my understanding being that blogging software = "personal publishing programme" that you can put on your own domain) I thought LJ was a dedicated blog hosting service?

Also, is it necessary to mention DreamHost?

To me, it would be clearer as:

"Blogs can be hosted by dedicated blog hosting services, such as LiveJournal, Deadjournal, Typepad, Vox or Wordpress.com. Alternatively they can be run on regular web hosting services using blog software - otherwise known as personal publishing platforms/programs - such as WordPress, Movable Type, blogger, Expression Engine or Greymatter."

--Vertilly 16:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me find my perfect blog.

I want to create a blog. My main issue, for what constitutes a perfect blog, is that it create interlinks, @ least as easy, as wikipedias double brackets. Are there blog hosts which interlink this easilly? I know of wikilogs, but as for thers editing my page...that is...eh...not so much.Thaddeus Slamp 20:03, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how can i create a blog

Under "Type", then "Genre" your link to "Slog" goes to a page about cricket (the sport) slogs. Shouldn't it go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slog_%28blog%29, which is a page about site blogs? When you take the link provided in this article it goes to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slog, which page itself provides another link to "Slog (disambiguation)", from which you can get to the real page you want, but it seems silly to have to go that round-about way to get to the information you want. AlanEarl 19:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add Wikipedia article Blog Promotion to Blog

Add Wikipedia article Blog Promotion to Blog. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Guadalupa543 (talk • contribs) 02:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Peter Merholz, inventor of the verb to blog

FYI: Just found something about his professional background: [1] 84.173.230.72 13:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Starting a blog

How do I do it? I have been blogging on Wikipedia's Sandbox long enough. 66.218.12.64 02:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try WordPress hosted or Blogspot. Computerjoe's talk 17:44, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: # 1.4 2004–present

..Some blogs were an important news source during the December 2004 Tsunami such as Medecins Sans Frontieres, which used SMS text messaging to report from affected areas in Sri Lanka and Southern India.

To the best of my knowledge, MSF wasn't blogging in the Tsunami's aftermath. The blog that defined disaster relief blogging was the South-East Asia Earthquake and Tsunami blog (See Intelliseek's Blogpulse for one study, Google's tsunami relief page and also the TsunamiHelp media coverage page). And the blog that reported and used text messaging was the now-defunct http://desimediabitch.blogspot.com, which at that time was called C*S*F, short for Chien(ne)s Sans Frontieres, which was a tongue-in-cheek homage to MSF. I'm posting this as a suggestion rather than editing the page myself since I was involved with both TsunamiHelp and C*S*F, and my views, as a result, can hardly be seen as neutral.Zigzackly 21:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

electrical and instrumentation engineering

Calling Kathy Sierra's blog "innocuous", while accurate, is an opinion-based statement and inappropriate coverage.

Types

In the types section it says "one comprising links is called a linklog,[11]" however the cited document says that one that contains links is called a weblog, can this please be corrected 88.107.32.193 23:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eye Watch

Have you watched your eyes?!

Kindly report what you see of your own eyes, the lids, the lashes, the corners. Let us build a data-base in this blog of what we all see. There is a lot to see, By the way

From among our reported experiences we will slowly evolve a home -brew eye yoga of sorts, Of beauty, of de-stress etc. For, is it not said that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder!

We should have enough data to interest experts to investigate & comment and make it all real to us objectively.

I need your feedback for me to have faith in watching my own eyes. Though I have found it good, I rarely remember to watch it but leap into the world forgetting all about it.

Thank You,

Don’t watch too much, though

Blog vs. Online Magazine

Given the broad definition of blog, I think there needs to be some discussion of how to distinguish a blog from an online magazine. It never actually says that blogs are all written (or mostly written) by one person; is that intended to be part of the definition? If so then it starts to become clearer; an electronic magazine would be written by multiple people with one or a small group of "editors".

Trouble is, Boing Boing for example is widely referred to as a blog, and yet is clearly more accurately described as an online magazine. Making Light perhaps a little less like a magazine, but three people currently have and use article-posting rights there. Both are clearly blogs in general usage.

This distinction is particularly important since "blogs" are explicitly not considered reliable (I believe, though I can't read the minds of the people making these decisions, because they're completely controlled by one person, and hence have no checks and balances on their accuracy). Since this article is cited in that article, it appears that the definition of blog here is becoming part of the Wiki standard for what's considered verifiable.

Dd-b 16:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Blog&oldid=142256912"