Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Day
When asked whether January 15 could be marked as Wikipedia Day, Larry Sanger graciously answered:
- We could, but no one but Wikipedians would care!
I had to move this from the main page to this page. It was just an offhand remark. Who knows, maybe some others will care. Does it matter, anyway, that no one else would care? :-) --Larry Sanger
Removed from main page:
- If you're interested in a Wikipedia T-shirt, add your name to Wikipedia T-shirts.
I don't think anything ever came of this. --mav
- No. Also, ask Jimbo about his nupedia coffee mugs. I tried to get him to send me one. :-/ KQ
January 15, 2003: I notice that the main page has surpassed one million hits. That's a landmark in itself -- maybe not a significant one, but there nonetheless. :) -- Modemac
January 15, 2003: This is my very first visit to the Wikipedia. And it turns out today is its "birthday". At first I thought: What a weird coincidence, but now I realized that I only found the Wikipedia because yesterday I read about WikiWikiWebs in the German computer magazine c't. And as that magazine is a very good one, I will now start a small article on it. Let's see how that goes... ;-) -- Thomas
- Welcome! I hope you like the place. :-) --mav
This page mostly talks about the front page redesign that happened this time last year. Perhaps someone could update for 2004? Fabiform 09:04, 15 Jan 2004 (UTC)
500,000 article estimate for WP Day 2004?
- (according to mathematical analysis assuming the Wikipedia follows exponential growth, we will have around 500,000 articles on Wikipedia's 3rd anniversary.)
What mathematical analysis said this? Please provide a link. --mav 03:44, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Does anyone know what the first Wikipedia article was? --Carnildo 10:09, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- That is a very interesting question! However I don't think there is any way to find that out other than asking Larry Sanger or another person who was here during the Nupedia/wikipedia.com move (who may, or may not, know). The reason is due to the fact the the software we used before, Usemod, had the nasty habit of deleting old versions of articles in a seemingly random way. So page versions prior to January 25, 2002 (the day we switched from Usemod) are incomplete and the first versions of pages are almost always not there. --mav 10:37, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- I believe the first articles were are articles from Nupedia who where imported to Wikipedia. Can not be many articles. --Walter 09:33, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Four years, and we still don't know. --Carnildo 23:37, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- The oldest page diff we've been able to find is this, on the second day of the project. --King of All the Franks 13:48, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
January 15, 2005: It it also worth mentioning that Wikipedia is #3 in Alexas reference sites category? I don't know how long it has been at #3
Wikipedia Hour ?
At what time of day was Wikipedia connected to the World Wide Web on 15th Jan 2001 ? There's a horoscope been drawn up at Talk:Astrology#A horoscope for Wikipedia, but no one knows the time of day so its been drawn for 12 noon. See image here Lumos3 22:02, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- It depends where you are in the world! I started that section just after it turned midnight here in New Zealand. GeorgeStepanek\talk 07:07, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I am certain that someone got it right just guessing... but how do we know? All I know is that when I typed this we had 921,212 articles. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:43, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
"Future of WIkipedia" in 2006 section
Is that really necessary? Deckiller 00:34, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
"20th Most popular"???
Alexa says we are 31st. Not 20th 220.127.116.11 03:47, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
- The three month average is 31, but the weekly average was 20 in the latest days and it is now 19. Mushroom 03:52, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
The article suffered from severe POV, I corrected it, we must be honest about the state of affairs to confront new challenges, the year in review is appropriate and unfortunately dark and grim. There is no point in pretending the problem does not exist or censoring the truth.
Anon is actually making the article more POV. The concept of NPOV should work like a balance, which the previous edits have. I am reverting it. Deckiller 17:00, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
- Just revert it as vandalism from now on, he's not being cooperative. Ashibaka tock 17:09, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
- Wrong Ashibaka, it is you who are being uncooperative. I have come to the talk page seeking discussion, and none of you have come here to meet me with discussion over content, instead you vandalize and revert, either be a man and discuss this honorably, or run like the coward you are to what ever dark corner of the web you come from.
Ironic fact about the history of this page
The history of both this page and its talk page before March 2002 are gone permanently per their entry on my history observations subpage. The page was moved from Wikipedia Day, which contains deleted edits, but the earliest edit registered there is from January 2003, and is just a cross-namespace redirect. Graham87 13:25, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia Day NYC 2010
Do people actually celebrate Wikipedia Day in person? We're going to try it in New York City sometime this January, perhaps at NYU. Any thoughts on some venerable traditions we could use? Pitch in your ideas at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/NYC.--Pharos (talk) 19:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)