Talk:Jimmy Wales

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 71.235.56.24 (talk) at 11:05, 24 November 2010 (→‎Vote to improve description of JimmyWalesJI5.jpg). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good articleJimmy Wales was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 14, 2005Articles for deletionKept
June 15, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
July 5, 2006Good article nomineeListed
October 10, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 17, 2006Good article reassessmentKept
June 13, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
August 14, 2007Articles for deletionSpeedily kept
August 31, 2007Articles for deletionSpeedily kept
December 20, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
September 16, 2008Good article nomineeListed
March 16, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article
Information If you need to contact Jimbo about something, please do so at his talk page, not here. As Jimbo explains...

"People who are trying to leave messages for me will likely be more satisfied if they leave messages on my user talk page than if they leave them here. This is the talk page for the article about me, not a place to talk to me. I rarely read this. --Jimbo Wales 06:05, 23 August 2005 (UTC)"[reply]

Jimmy Wales' personal income / wealth network

Hey there!

I was just wondering while there is no mention to what Jimmy earns in the article. Being Wikipedia an institution founded by donations, shouldn't all its "numbers" be public? I don't know much about it, I suppose they already are, so I wonder why not mention it in the article?

Some personalities like Mark Zuckerberg or any other of these magnates have got their net worth or they income in the personal box, at least.

Why is this information nonexistent in Jimmy's case?

Cheers from Pakistan!!

Ahmed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.157.111.182 (talk) 19:20, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The simple answer is that if you can find a reliable source that reports on Wales's personal net worth or on his salary (from what?), and you think it's notable, then you can suggest adding it to the article. The reason sources report on Zuckerberg's net worth is because, well, he's worth quite a lot and it's worth the time of a magazine like Forbes to figure it out.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:49, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If this dude be worth so much scratch, why do he be keep on axin fo money on EVERY DAMN ENTRY? I be trying to look at articles and dis dude be axin for money. He be poor! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.138.33 (talk) 03:14, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Jimmy doesn't get paid by Wikimedia. You can see financial reports for the organization on the Foundation site. In medias res (talk) 05:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What daughter?

Apparently where it says "and had a daughter before separating.[57]" under the section Personal Life, the source provided at [57] says nothing of any daughter. It mentions that Wales and his wife were separated and were planning a divorce, but no mention of the daughter was made, and the sentence is even broken up by citations as follows "The couple were married in Monroe County, Florida in March 1997,[68] and had a daughter before separating.[57]", indicating the "daughter" portion had its own separate citation, though again I read the article 3 times and used several keywords in the find tool and found zero reference to the daughter. This is obviously not to say said daughter didn't exist, as I'm sure Jimbo could verify the existence of his own daughter, but the source should not be cited for that section and if possible a different citation added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.6.245 (talk) 16:48, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I concur - [1] tells of no daughter. --George2001hi 20:18, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the citation is establishing the word "separating", not "daughter". -- Seth Finkelstein (talk) 20:26, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed the citations to cover separation and daughter.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:30, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Righty oh, I thought the citations were a bit mixed-up. --George2001hi 20:57, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the bit about "Monroe County" is original research. I doubt if it appears anywhere other than in the original research, and in any event is pointless trivia which would only serve to confuse the reader. The existence of my daughter should be verifiable in any number of reliable sources.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 23:42, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ancestry.com drives me bananas. Monroe County may be trivial, but something has to support the marriage to Rohan and the date of the marriage. There's a note in the article about a marriage certificate, but it appears to be sourced to non-online sources, which I can't see. The daughter is already sourced now.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:54, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do you get this dude's head out of every damn article!

Do you dudes know how to get his head out of every damn article? Whenevers I open up a new article on the "wiki", I get this dude saying "hey many I gots a personal message for you."

When I be looking up an article on South African Pumas or Pliny the Elder, the last thing I want is this dudes head in the article. It aint got nothing to do with nothing. AND YOU CAINT EDIT HIS HEAD OUT OF IT! Somebody--PLEASE--put something about this in the wiki page for this dude!

Chill, homes. See the [x] in the box to the right of the dude's head? Click that shit, yo, free yo'self from his eyes bein' all up in yo shit. Skomorokh 02:08, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your tip. I was getting abit annoyed with the enormous banner of the multi-millionaire Jimmy Wales asking us Joe Schmoes for cash. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.30.193.16 (talk) 12:05, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Better pic?

Can we get some better pics of jimbo? Every "personal appeal" banner looks like either a pedophile or a serial killer. Possibly homeless. Jimmy try some personal grooming maybe. --199.173.225.33 (talk) 15:19, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Upvoted for truth 85.92.209.135 (talk) 15:32, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
actually he looks like a supervillian of billion dollar corperation, all he needs is a white fluffy kitty--Lerdthenerd (talk) 16:17, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Correct and Protect search snip-it vandalism

The current google blurb/snipo for this article shows a vandalized name


Born, Jimmy F***n***** Donal Wales


I'm a novice wiki user so I'm not sure if this is a google crawiling or wikipedia issue, or how to correct it so I'll ask for help on this one.

Thanks Smile4Chomsky (talk) 02:55, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just vandalism and has been reverted. →GƒoleyFour (GSV) 02:57, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the Google page has not refreshed. →GƒoleyFour (GSV) 03:04, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In all honesty the newest is extremely creepy and the ones of him staring honestly really bug me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.167.72.169 (talk) 02:09, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

Is this guy really notable? Who even cares about him? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.85.131.55 (talk) 20:22, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:GNG. Rodhullandemu 20:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you serious? J390 (talk) 18:44, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He's notable if you think that Wikipedia is notable (which I do, as do millions of others).

98.245.150.162 (talk) 02:53, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jimbo Wales is so notable that his page gets vandalized every year on April Fool's Day. =D CycloneGU (talk) 04:58, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I feel he has a point. Shouldn't he be, like, included in the Wikimedia Foundation article, for example? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.24.79.174 (talk) 21:38, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vote to improve description of JimmyWalesJI5.jpg

totally gives off a Hank Scorpio vibe....c'moooon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Turingmachina (talkcontribs) 01:29, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

no Declined as irrelevant, and as regards a Turing Machine, your proposition is formally undecideable; however, as regards the halting problem, I've halted it. Rodhullandemu 01:35, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is this spam? People keep trying to sell these damn Turing Machines. I see you!

Date of birth

Am I the only one who finds it a little ironic and strange that we can't be sure of the DOB of the founder of Wiki?

You'd think he would come here and correct it himself? 95.148.202.176 (talk) 01:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eid al- Ghadeer

Dear Jimmy Wales.

I appreciate your work as this is really helpfull in our daily life.I can not imajine what the world would be without Wikipedia.You have done an great job and still doing it while the whole world is getting benifit out of this site. I have a request that while searching to for EID-e GHADEER, I found it on Wikipedia as Eid al-Ghadeer. The page is very informative but there is one thing which is not acceptable and that is a Potrait or some kind of Picture attached at the left corner of the page written below to it is "The inventure of Ali(A.S) at Ghadir Khum".It is forbidden in Islam to draw Pictures of Hazrat Muhammad(S.A.W) or Mola Ali (A.S).I am from a Shia sect and if you want Shia's to visit this page I would request you to Please, remove this picture immediately.I know its just a picture for you but it is not acceptable for us.I would be very obliged if you can do this favour and remove this picture.

With Regards. ALI RIZVI. ali_ned@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.186.64.103 (talk) 10:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]