![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is heavily geared towards SSC's POV. I've refrained from editing this article because I am a member of LinuxGazette.net's Answer Gang, but it's worth noting that User:TaranRampersad, who added the POV material, is
the current editor of LinuxGazette.com -- Jim Regan 00:24, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
As the original "Answer Guy" I have to agree with Jim here. Beyond that I also have to question whether Linux Gazette actually deserves a Wikipedia article entry at all. I don't consider myself to be worthy of an article, either. My inclination would be to recuse myself because of my obvious bias. However, the article already violates Wikipedia's NPOV policy. So I'm fixing it as best I can. JimD 01:57, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)
As Taran Rampersad, I'm saying that before I jumped in the article was heavily slanted toward the non-SSC Point of View, which can be determined by the history. I've made additions based on fact, not opinion. If others can bring facts to bear, or wish to question the facts presented, then that's fair game. I'm not here to change this Wikipedia entry by myself, but I will not stand by and let SSC get rained upon in public opinion again.
Bring facts. With facts, there's less POV and more article. I removed the link to my personal website, and in exchange affirm that I am the current editor of Linux Gazette.-- TaranRampersad 01:33, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, I beg to differ. Both of your edits were heavily laden with POV: I've left a message on your talk page outlining those in your last edit. Nobody's trying to rain on SSC here, what we're trying to do is accurately reflect both sides of an argument. Before your edits, the article stated:
I really don't see how that's "heavily slanted toward the non-SSC Point of View": if it's heavily slanted in any direction, it's towards SSC's POV, as it did not mention the Answer Gang's stated reasons for moving. Just to spare you from having to go to the competition's website:
(From A Brief History of Linux Gazette by Rick Moen.
(The deleted mailbag content may be viewed here. Compare with SSC's version) -- Jim Regan 00:38, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) Oh... I think I see now: "decided to continue the Linux Gazette in its original form." Is that what you consider to be "heavily slanted"? Sorry, but that is fact: Linux Gazette.net is much closer to the original form of Linux Gazette (in my opinion -- sorry, couldn't resist). -- Jim Regan 00:48, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Look, I responded here to your questions: [ [1]]
As for the rest, SSC hasn't really said much, and this is not the proper context for SSC to do so. However, everything in the article can be substantiated - otherwise I would not have added it. At the link above, you can see how to contact me. I'll be in flux over the next month, but I'll be around as much as I can.
Currently, (May 1st, 2006) linuxgazette.com redirects to the linuxjournal.com homepage. So it appears that linuxgazette.com is effectively dead. -- 209.206.234.62 20:13, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
And more recently (2015-02-01) http://www.linuxgazette.net reads "The main content of this site is currently down for service" and looking at the page info tells me that it's been this way since (2014-05-29) while the most recent issue available on http://linuxgazette.net is from June 2011 (#186). So, has Linux Gazette died? In that case a bit more info about its demise would be nice to have on the page. TomasPospisek ( talk) 20:02, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is heavily geared towards SSC's POV. I've refrained from editing this article because I am a member of LinuxGazette.net's Answer Gang, but it's worth noting that User:TaranRampersad, who added the POV material, is
the current editor of LinuxGazette.com -- Jim Regan 00:24, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
As the original "Answer Guy" I have to agree with Jim here. Beyond that I also have to question whether Linux Gazette actually deserves a Wikipedia article entry at all. I don't consider myself to be worthy of an article, either. My inclination would be to recuse myself because of my obvious bias. However, the article already violates Wikipedia's NPOV policy. So I'm fixing it as best I can. JimD 01:57, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)
As Taran Rampersad, I'm saying that before I jumped in the article was heavily slanted toward the non-SSC Point of View, which can be determined by the history. I've made additions based on fact, not opinion. If others can bring facts to bear, or wish to question the facts presented, then that's fair game. I'm not here to change this Wikipedia entry by myself, but I will not stand by and let SSC get rained upon in public opinion again.
Bring facts. With facts, there's less POV and more article. I removed the link to my personal website, and in exchange affirm that I am the current editor of Linux Gazette.-- TaranRampersad 01:33, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, I beg to differ. Both of your edits were heavily laden with POV: I've left a message on your talk page outlining those in your last edit. Nobody's trying to rain on SSC here, what we're trying to do is accurately reflect both sides of an argument. Before your edits, the article stated:
I really don't see how that's "heavily slanted toward the non-SSC Point of View": if it's heavily slanted in any direction, it's towards SSC's POV, as it did not mention the Answer Gang's stated reasons for moving. Just to spare you from having to go to the competition's website:
(From A Brief History of Linux Gazette by Rick Moen.
(The deleted mailbag content may be viewed here. Compare with SSC's version) -- Jim Regan 00:38, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) Oh... I think I see now: "decided to continue the Linux Gazette in its original form." Is that what you consider to be "heavily slanted"? Sorry, but that is fact: Linux Gazette.net is much closer to the original form of Linux Gazette (in my opinion -- sorry, couldn't resist). -- Jim Regan 00:48, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Look, I responded here to your questions: [ [1]]
As for the rest, SSC hasn't really said much, and this is not the proper context for SSC to do so. However, everything in the article can be substantiated - otherwise I would not have added it. At the link above, you can see how to contact me. I'll be in flux over the next month, but I'll be around as much as I can.
Currently, (May 1st, 2006) linuxgazette.com redirects to the linuxjournal.com homepage. So it appears that linuxgazette.com is effectively dead. -- 209.206.234.62 20:13, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
And more recently (2015-02-01) http://www.linuxgazette.net reads "The main content of this site is currently down for service" and looking at the page info tells me that it's been this way since (2014-05-29) while the most recent issue available on http://linuxgazette.net is from June 2011 (#186). So, has Linux Gazette died? In that case a bit more info about its demise would be nice to have on the page. TomasPospisek ( talk) 20:02, 1 February 2015 (UTC)