From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former featured article 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.
On this day...Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive Article milestones
Date Process Result
February 5, 2005 Peer review Reviewed
March 9, 2005 Peer review Reviewed
April 4, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted
April 9, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted
May 4, 2005 Featured article candidate Promoted
August 1, 2006 Featured article review Demoted
September 15, 2006 Good article nominee Listed
February 25, 2007 Peer review Reviewed
May 17, 2007 Articles for deletion Speedily kept
August 12, 2008 Peer review Reviewed
August 15, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept
September 6, 2008 Articles for deletion Speedily kept
July 21, 2009 Peer review Reviewed
July 26, 2012 Peer review Reviewed
November 7, 2012 Featured article candidate Not promoted
August 25, 2014 Guild of Copy Editors Copyedited
September 5, 2014 Good article reassessment Delisted
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 15, 2005.
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of February 7, 2007.
Current status: Former featured article
Daily page views for this article over the last 2.5 years

Detailed traffic statistics

Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2018[edit]

bunihotriubhejnsiuagvuiohdnsoijngiboke — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:37, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Not done - gibberish that makes no sense.--SkyGazer 512 What will you say? / What did I do? 13:42, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Should 'Wiki' be added as a nickname?[edit]

Here is a possible change to the lead sentence: Wikipedia, often shortened to Wiki,... . This adds a common nickname for Wikipedia. I'm of two or more minds about it, yet if the common nickname (would it be considered slang?) hasn't been discussed before, maybe worth kicking around. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:48, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

@Randy Kryn: The thing is, wiki and Wikipedia are not the same thing. A "wiki" is any website that can be edited by anyone (usually without having to even create an account), while "Wikipedia" is one specific wiki. "Wiki" is often used as a slang shortening for "Wikipedia," but the fact that they're actually two separate terms is why I'm not sure if it should be added in that way, although I'm not saying it can't be added at all. Maybe we could put in something like, "Wikipedia is sometimes abbreviated to 'wiki' as slang, although the term wiki actually refers to any website that can by edited by anyone."? Something like that might work. However, we will still need sources supporting this, even if we know that this is true from personal experience. I'm definitely open to suggestions, and would like to hear the opinions of other users.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 22:57, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Agree with everything you say. And it would be and look awkward to use the slang nickname in the lead sentence, but a mention somewhere (with sources - wondering if some writers use the slang term in print) makes some kind of sense. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:03, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a registered trademark[edit]

So why don't you use the symbol ® on the logo? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhuyquang1 (talkcontribs) 00:54, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

We don't use trademark symbols. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks.TeraTIX 23:23, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Info Bubbles[edit]

i just want to say how much of a good idea i think the new 'info bubbles' ,as i call them, are. As most the time, when i read an article, i always come across something in the article, related or not, that peaks my interest. so say im reading about Shia Labeouf, and i come across the word 'plagiarism', and i'm like ooh, what does plagiarism mean?, so i'll right click the hyperlink and open it in a new tab so i can read about that after i've finished reading what i started out with, and more often than not, i'll end up with five or more new tabs open because i'll find other words or topics i want to know more about whilst reading the article. But now there are these cool info bubbles that come up when you hover the mouse over a hyperlinked word, that give you a small description or piece of info from the page that particular hyperlink leads too, which is so much handier, especially if you were just wanting a short description of a topic or word you knew nothing about, or were more curious about. so kudos to whoever came up with that. as a side note, a while back on a page, i made a suggestion for certain pages, like ones with scientific or mathematical equations or wording, to have what i call a 'layman's section' for those of us who don't understand what we are looking at, but want to. some of those pages, for instance a page on say, quantum mechanics, might be written in a way that is too complicated to understand, and is written under the assumption that whoever is reading it, will automatically know what is being written about, especially when it comes to pages with scientific equations written on them, for instance the page on 'proton' has equations on, with no explanation of what the letters mean in the equations. so say a kid was curious about protons, or had an assignment at school, to be able to understand what the heck they are looking at, they would have to go and learn all that stuff so as to be able to read and understand the equations, this is an example of a page that could benefit from a layman's section. Anyway, im getting off the point, my point is, that since i posted about adding this new section to the more complicated pages, i've noticed people have actually started adding the odd explanation to things starting with layman's terms, this means... and i think its so helpful, so to all the people out there doing that, kudos to you guys too for helping simplify those otherwise complicated reads, for those of us not in the know on certain subjects. Wikipedia is the in my opinion, the best source of information on the internet. i know it gets a lot of stick for being error prone, or has fun made of it for being written by anybody, meaning what your reading could be wrong. but of course that is just daft. because most of what is written is correct, and the great thing is, that unlike a book encyclopedia where if there is an error, you have to wait for a new print for a correction, if one happens at all, with wikipedia, it can be changed instantaneously almost, to be correct. in a way, wikipedia is like the best metaphor for the argument about science over religion, and idea's over faith, where idea' can be changed , but faith is harder to change. wikipedia is an idea that just keeps changing as it gets more informed, and its a great one. in fact wikipedia is kind of like a collection of all human thought ever on the planet, every idea, every story, every factoid, just everything a human has thought, written, or done, can be found in wikipedia, and if its not here, it can be added with the press of a few buttons. if you ever wanted an Artificial Intelligence to have a collection of all human knowledge, it should have a live link to wikipedia, that way it would probably be the most comprehensive know it all robot ever made....which would be prett sweet. thanks wikipedia for changing the world, and making it easier to find things out, and bringing all the worlds knowledge into one place for people to find. youve done a heck of task, and wikipedia should be conidered one of the wonders of the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D0S81 (talkcontribs) 02:02, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2018[edit]

put a smiley emoji on every page! (talk) 10:54, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: that's not encyclopedic at all. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social website. L293D ( • ) 11:53, 19 June 2018 (UTC)