Talk:Open knowledge
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Isn't wikipedia an initiative promoting Open Knowledge?
[edit]I am surprised not to see wikipedia being quoted as a collaborative initiative promoting Open Knowledge! Charele (talk) 14:52, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Suggested merge
[edit]The title suggests a merge and then redirect to/from Open Knowledge (capital 'K'). --K (talk) 10:29, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
- With the current state of this article, this is indeed the right thing to do. The only reference here for the definition of "Open knowledge" is from that foundation's website. The rest of the article tries to look at other historical cases and describe them as "open knowledge", which is not necessarily incorrect, but without references, it is too close to original research. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 08:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
This article does not relate to the contributions of today's work. Sound like your leveling somebody behind. Where are the contributions of today's words of real knowledge of creative mind and your beliefs not just in plagiarism at it's wDreamingskey (talk) 17:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)orst.its in a hypothetical stand point somebody else's2023 (THR) real advances.