301–305 of 305 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anecdotally, the overwhelming majority of people who I've observed using Wikipedia go to www.wikipedia.com and then select "English".
But does it matter what language is more popular? That is not what Wikipedia is about, really
Sent this email to them: " Absolutely terrible; increasing the signal/noise ratio, in addition to increasing unnecessary white space were extremely bad design choices. The purpose of Wikipedia is to share information. The changes that you proposed impede that goal by the addition of a step where the user has to "understand" the design, before they can begin to use it. You should have reviewed mathematical and scienti…
Also I dont understand these kinds of comments. Do you want us to email them that post with the quotes around them and attribute it to you?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where can I find them?
Type in "WP:FAC" into the search. Believe me, it's more rigorous than pretty much anything I've eve seen. About 6 years ago I wrote the article on exploding whales, and this hit the main page. Now it's not even featured any more!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Type in "WP:FAC" into the search. Believe me, it's more rigorous than pretty much anything I've eve seen. About 6 years ago I wrote the article on exploding whales, and this hit the main page. Now it's not even featured any more!
You wrote that? My hat's off to you, sir. Did you know they have an entire category http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Exploding_animals now? :)
I did a lot of things on Wikipedia. Perhaps my most lasting creations will have been [citation needed] and the admin's noticeboard. Though I have, perhaps, a somewhat dubious legacy, it was a fairly amazing experience - rather marred by the manner in which I had to leave the project.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not just that - they redefine the word "history" Despite the historical use of "history" on WikiPedia, I'd rather it be called "Revisions." Revisions is much clearer as a concept. > Not sure how well they thought this out. They seem o have taken their own design brief, bu not consulted with Wikipedians! I'm not a Wikipedian (I assume that's what contributors refer to themselves as?), but I'd welcome some more perso…
"Revision" is also a more honest admittance that edits are often revisionist history.