G'day folks,
E-consultancy claims that Wikipedia dominates the online encyclopedia
market.
http://econsultancy.com/blog/3185-wikipedia-has-97-of-the-encyclopedia-market-online
*Online collaborative encyclopedia Wikipedia has a massive 97% share of
internet visits among the top five reference
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:21 AM, brewhaha%40edmc.net brewh...@edmc.netwrote:
This is about the second time that someone slapped me with a rule in Talk
Page Guidelines. The one about revising your own comments can reduce
revision rates to a snail's pace while you discuss them in e-mail. Please
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 6:21 AM, brewhaha%40edmc.net brewh...@edmc.netwrote:
This is about the second time that someone slapped me with a rule in Talk
Page Guidelines. The one about revising your own comments can reduce
revision rates to a snail's pace while you discuss them in e-mail. Please
Funny how it supposedly closes tomorrow but it's already done and archived.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 5:44 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Proposed trial:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Flagged_revisions/Trial
The voting page:
Probably because of jimbo's comment
On 1/26/09, The Cunctator cuncta...@gmail.com wrote:
Funny how it supposedly closes tomorrow but it's already done and archived.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 5:44 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Proposed trial:
The BBC has an article on the Flagged Revisions controversy:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7851400.stm
William King (Willking1979)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
2009/1/26 William King williamcarlk...@gmail.com:
The BBC has an article on the Flagged Revisions controversy:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7851400.stm
Apparently they called Michael Peel of WMUK but didn't use the comment ...
- d.
___
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Philip Sandifer snowspin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 26, 2009, at 10:16 AM, William King wrote:
The BBC has an article on the Flagged Revisions controversy:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7851400.stm
I'm sure there's context for the photo, but I
In [[WP:REDACT]], a section in the talk space guidelines, the rules say you
must discuss changes to your own words with strikeout text. I found it very
awkward, especially since I hav been ignoring it, and replacing whole
conversations with a one line note, for most of my time here. I was going
Readers of this list might be interested in this editor's contributions (
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Brewhaha%40edmc.net
)
Seems they have been blocked indef for disruption and soapboxing on the
wiki. Much like on this list.
--
Alex
(User:Majorly)
Hi,
I think it is a Chinese top.
Yes, I think you're right.
—Thomas Larsen
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Jan 26, 2009, at 7:11 PM, Carcharoth wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Philip Sandifer snowspin...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Jan 26, 2009, at 10:16 AM, William King wrote:
The BBC has an article on the Flagged Revisions controversy:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7851400.stm
2009/1/27 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/1/27 Philip Sandifer snowspin...@gmail.com:
As I said, I'm sure there is context - I would assume it was from the
Taipei Wikimania, etc. And that it is cropped so that it looks more
feminine than it probably actually did.
Still, the BBC picked a
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:45 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/1/27 Philip Sandifer snowspin...@gmail.com:
As I said, I'm sure there is context - I would assume it was from the
Taipei Wikimania, etc. And that it is cropped so that it looks more
feminine than it probably actually
Probably too lazy to deal with all the GFDL stuff we keep hounding them about.
:)
bibliomaniac15
--- On Mon, 1/26/09, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
From: Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BBC article on Flagged Revisions
To: English Wikipedia
E-mailing revisions to an author concerned with the article you want to
revise would do about the same thing, plus, rather than having a few
volunteers for the process and the resulting Jerman experience with a
backlog and weeks of delay, that author might hav time to offer feedback,
including
WHY ON EARTH is Jimbo wearing a Japanese dress?
--
Alvaro
On 26-01-2009, at 20:53, Philip Sandifer snowspin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 26, 2009, at 10:16 AM, William King wrote:
The BBC has an article on the Flagged Revisions controversy:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7851400.stm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:35 PM, brewhaha%40edmc.net
wrote:
E-mailing revisions to an author concerned with the article you want to
revise would do about the same thing, plus, rather than having a few
volunteers for the process and the resulting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Alvaro García wrote:
WHY ON EARTH is Jimbo wearing a Japanese dress?
Excuse me. Jimbo wearing a 'Japanese dress' would look more like this:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 07:54:59 -0500, Elias Friedman wrote:
It's usually considered bad form to change your talk page comments,
especially if someone has already responded to them. This is because such
editing can change the tone and meaning of the other editor's comments. The
usual course of
20 matches
Mail list logo
