Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2011-10-24/Opinion essay

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

Discuss this story

An interesting feature of WP:V, which is really only explained in the additional WP:Published page is that once the last known copy of some work disappears, it can no longer be cited in Wikipedia. The boundaries are even more obscure when it comes to other type of items that must be considered publicly accessible to be verifiable. Uʔ (talk) 10:34, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting opinion, but what's the frog doing there? It's extinct, and a wikipedia article won't bring it back. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 11:03, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November @ Wikisource: is validation month. Rather than the usual project of undertaking to transcribe a work, it is the month where the focus is on progressing works that have proofread once, to proofread twice or more. Always open for new participants! — billinghurst sDrewth 11:24, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's emblematic of the species that are becoming extinct everyday, many of them without humans ever discovering their existence. In the Golden Toad case, we managed to get some science done. Perhaps we can learn from their extinction. But, if we don't preserve knowledge about their extinction, there is no opportunity to learn. Do you cry for what is lost that was never known or only for that which is known? Is it then better to not know at all? --Hammersoft (talk) 13:48, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This article underscores the importance of the offsite backup program discussed in the last issue of Signpost. The engineers for WMF should have plans for worse-case scenarios such that Wikipedia is not lost. Wikipedia should survive even if a nuclear bomb were dropped on a WMF server farm or two. As the article shows, libraries do not survive wars. Wikipedia should be able to survive even a nuclear war... literally. Jason Quinn (talk) 16:46, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What astonishes me is that it took the WMF ten years to think "Hey, maybe we should have an off site backup?" --Hammersoft (talk) 18:05, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why don't we sell DVD sets of the backups for the fundraiser? Actually anyone could do that, as long as they can download the mirrors. Dualus (talk) 18:04, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Part of that is that for a long time getting dumps at all was patchy. Wikipedia experienced very rapid growth, and it became really hard to package it up and give it to someone else to keep hold of, especially with the expectation that their copy be kept up to date. The technology needed time (and a lot of hard work) to catch up. - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 23:27, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I like the addition of an opinion column in the Signpost. I hope it sticks.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:01, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Starting with the issue on October 31st, I will be the Opinion Desk manager. I intend on trying my very hardest to ensure that the column does, in fact, continue. I've got one piece for the 31st, a tentative piece for Noverber 7th, and an interesting idea for column for the long term, which I'll roll out the first week that no one's brought anything in. Sven Manguard Wha? 11:43, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

People interested on this topic can read more here Lost Memory - Libraries and archives destroyed in the twentieth century (Archived August 30, 2011, at WebCite). Regards. emijrp (talk) 11:16, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-10-24/Opinion_essay&oldid=1086042086"