Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Essays/Archives/2010/February
|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
What is the purpose of Portal:Wikipedia essays? Portals are generally used to showcase the content of the encyclopedia, not to self-reference Wikipedia stuff. Why not just use project space for this? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:42, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well really, its a portal. The Wikipedia:Self-references to avoid policy exists to keep articles from citing Wikipedia, so I don't know that it really is appropriate to apply here. This may however, be a case of exposing the "man behind the curtain" a little too much for people who come to wikipedia just to read articles. Then again, if a portal exists, and all the links to the portal are on essays in WP namespace, then the only place the portal is exposed to the general public is on a list of all portals, if one exists (I assume it does).
All this said, if we can still call it a portal (since it quacks like one) and have it in WP namespace, I'd be fine with that. What do you other WikiProject members think? ɳoɍɑfʈ Talk! 03:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
- The "Portal:" namespace is an odd duck to begin with. But as I understand it, it's meant to be more or less a master table of contents for Wikipedia's encyclopedic content. So "meta" content shouldn't be in the portal namespace.--Father Goose (talk) 03:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
The following quote is from WP:Portals:
|“||Portals are pages intended to serve as "Main Pages" for specific topics or areas. Portals may be associated with one or more WikiProjects; unlike WikiProjects, however, they are meant for both readers and editors of Wikipedia, and should promote content and encourage contribution...The idea of a portal is to help readers and/or editors navigate their way through Wikipedia topic areas through pages similar to the Main Page. In essence, portals are useful entry-points to Wikipedia content.||”|
So first of all there is a bit of ambiguity in the above quote, as the second sentence says "they are meant for both readers and editors," while the third says "readers and/or editors." If we can accept that Wikipedia essays are not only meant for editors to read, then a portal seems fine. If we cannot accept that, then we must debate.
To me, a Wikipedia Essay portal provides a helpful service to individuals interested in Wikipedia essays. It provides needed navigation to an almost unnavigable pile of over 1,000 essays (not counting user essays). It provides an introduction to Wikipedia essays for readers and/or editors that are unfamiliar with them. And I think letting readers see the man behind the curtain (i.e. "There is such a thing as an essay written about the inner workings of Wikipedia, because such inner workings are complex) if they choose to do so is beneficial. Really, if someone is scrolling through the portal directory and they come upon this one and click it, if they decide they aren't interested, the back button is easy to hit... But for those interested, they will have found something new and useful.
I don't think that not having a portal on something like this in the past is a good reason in an of itself to not have one now. Why stand on tradition/status quo for tradition/status quo's sake? I'm going to request comment from the WikiProject: Portals folks and see where they weigh in, as well. Like I said before, we can likely move this portal to WP namespace and still call it a portal, but let's make sure we're really not wanted before doing that. ɳoɍɑfʈ Talk! 14:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- I think having this portal is acceptable. If anything, it may bring more interested people into actually productively contributing to the encyclopedia, and that's not a bad thing. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:08, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey all, I've been busy moving and starting a new job, but expect to be back to this project next week, so hang tight if I haven't replied in the discussions on this page. ɳoɍɑfʈ Talk! 13:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)