For English, and other languages also:
What I suggest is a '''Wikipedia Two'' - an encyclopedia supplement
where the standard of notability is much relaxed, but which will be
different from Wikia by still requiring Verifiability and NPOV. It
would include the lower levels of barely notable
A many people on this list all know this by heart but since
this is testimonial time -- and not all of you know me that
extensively -- very briefly:
First modern encyclopaedia me and my sister had was a
very cheaply produced set called Combi, written in
Finnish, with 5 colour printed volumes, and
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Robin McCain ro...@slmr.com wrote:
I find it bizarre that inclusion of information of local importance is
encouraged in the internationalized local language wikipediae but
discouraged in the U.S. English wikipedia. So events of local interest in a
town in
On 14 March 2012 16:34, Robin McCain ro...@slmr.com wrote:
I find it bizarre that inclusion of information of local importance is
encouraged in the internationalized local language wikipediae but
discouraged in the U.S. English wikipedia. So events of local interest in a
town in Romania are
On 3/15/2012 3:10 AM, foundation-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Local events in western countries are pretty easy to cover within
wikipedia's rules. A mix of local news and the local history mob
usually sees that there are plenty of sources.
On the other hand writing about Odek (Joseph
On 15 March 2012 15:23, Robin McCain ro...@slmr.com wrote:
In that specific case you'd need a team of archeologists and war crimes
investigators to collect raw data and analyze it.
One Acholi speaking anthropologist would be enough.
How much of this general lack of published information is
I did use a very old konversationslexikon as a child, mainly for the
pictures. With our children this got replaced now by online resources. And
no, not by wikipedia, but by YouTube. And every time I spend 15 minutes to
find a video to illustrate something it makes me a little sad that we as a
On 14 March 2012 00:22, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
encyclopedias as a kid? Was a
On 14 March 2012 07:33, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:
I did use a very old konversationslexikon as a child, mainly for the
pictures. With our children this got replaced now by online resources. And
no, not by wikipedia, but by YouTube. And every time I spend 15 minutes to
On 14 March 2012 05:16, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote:
I will actually look for a copy of the 15th edition (for sentimental
reasons) to buy before they get too rare and too expensive :D Of course I
will miss it! If Britannica is gone we will need to start printing
Wikipedia ;-)
I see
Sure, that isn't the problem ;) go to USA is *so* cheap those days ;)
I was actually about to go request the one from my old school, they should
give the book to the only girl who read the full school library right? ;)
(well, 80% but I left before graduate from High School, so I might had got
I did use a very old konversationslexikon as a child, mainly for the
pictures. With our children this got replaced now by online resources. And
no, not by wikipedia, but by YouTube. And every time I spend 15 minutes to
find a video to illustrate something it makes me a little sad that we as a
2012/3/14 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 14 March 2012 05:16, Béria Lima berial...@gmail.com wrote:
I will actually look for a copy of the 15th edition (for sentimental
reasons) to buy before they get too rare and too expensive :D Of course I
will miss it! If Britannica is gone we will
I had a small encyclopedia at home (only one volume, but a massive volume)
and there was a copy of Britannica in the local library and, later, at
secondary school.
But I started getting frustrated with them when I was about 12 or 13,
because the shorter articles rarely answered the questions I
did you use print encyclopedias as a kid?
Oh yes. I especially loved #6 of Lithuanian Soviet Encyclopedia
http://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaizdas:Lietuviskoji_tarybine_enciklopedija_resize.jpg
- L* had airplanes and M* had automobiles ;)
B* had whales (hence my obsession with Exploding Whale
Why did the articles in Brittania keep getting shorter? Because printing
on paper costs money. Storage on the Internet is free by comparison. -
So why do our editors insist on reducing what might be an interesting
article down to something so brief it might as well be on paper in a
book that
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 5:22 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
2010's 32-volume set will be its last. (Now I want to get one, to
replace my old set!) Future versions will be digital only.
Dear Robin,
There are several reasons for making a text not too long. Pity with
the reader is one of them.
I personally try to be reluctant with generalizations about Wikipeda
language versions. They usually are not true. It's often like the
thing that the grass in the neighbour's yard is
I don't think it is pity to reduce an 800 word article down to under 200
words. Instead of something readable you end up either with a Who's Who
entry - filled with insider abbreviations and obscure wording that must
be decoded or something so bland it has no value to anyone intrested
enough
On 14 March 2012 17:34, Robin McCain ro...@slmr.com wrote:
I find it bizarre that inclusion of information of local importance is
encouraged in the internationalized local language wikipediae but
discouraged in the U.S. English wikipedia.
What U.S. English Wikipedia? I have read plenty of
2012/3/13 Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com
Today our digital database is much larger than what we can fit in the
print set. And it is up to date because we can revise it within
minutes anytime we need to, and we do it many times each day.
Wow, they update the encyclopedia many times each day.
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
2010's 32-volume set will be its last. (Now I want to get one, to
replace my old set!) Future versions will be digital only.
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 8:22 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
2010's 32-volume set will be its last. (Now I want to get one, to
replace my old set!) Future versions will be digital only.
I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
motivation or interest in
On 13 March 2012 20:22, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
encyclopedias as a kid? Was a
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 7:22 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
encyclopedias as a
My answers to Phoebe questions. (I tryed to keep it short to not create a
lot of problems to read, if you need a bigger version you can ask me) :)
*I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from a
Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
27 matches
Mail list logo
