This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Slashdot article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3 |
![]() | Slashdot was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do we really need to list all those people? -- TheSeer ( Talkˑ Contribs) 00:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
IMHO, we should include the murderer reference. You can't even mention Hans on slashdot without getting a ton of black humor about the "killer filesystem." 75.88.236.109 ( talk) 21:06, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
I've found reliable citations for three of the people on the list. I am unable to find good sources that meet Wikipedia's WP:RS criteria for these people, so I am moving them to the talk page for now. If a good source can be found (and not just a Slashdot user page), they can be added back with the citation, but a laundry list is really unnecessary.
The "Appearances in books" and "Appearances in popular fiction" sections are very unspecific and as such, not very useful, can anyone improve them that has access to those texts? If the site is being merely "named" or "named indirectly" or "mentioned," that's of negligible encyclopedic value. Шизомби ( talk) 04:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Still not sure if minor "appearances" are notable or not, so I'm leaving it for now. Anyway, The novel Cosmonaut Keep is available on Google Books. Slashdot is mentioned on p. 29: "What's with the f**king news?" someone's saying, shaking his head and blinking hard. "I can't get CNN, can't even get Slashdot..." WTF? ( talk) 15:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Can't really find anything to confirm Slashdot's mention in these two books. Moving here for further discussion. WTF? ( talk) 16:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I've removed the following entry from the 'appearances in books section:
It doesn't seem to refer to the Slashdot effect, as stated, though it's difficult to confirm, since the particular pages of interest are not available at Google Books (I guess we'll have to see if it's in the library). Anyway, I found another book that's citing it -- here. It refers to, "A capability is provided for user or peer assessment of the quality and usefulness of the supplied metadata as well as the geographic data files.[cites 'Emergence'] The system also provides a means for reaching people interested in using or contributing commons-licensed geographic data.[cites 'Linked'] WTF? ( talk) 16:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
The primary sources tags need to be removed. You're not going to get information on this subject from printed sources, because no other printed sources exist.
I won't do it myself, but can we at least get some discussion on this, rather than the usual tyrant simply materialising and reverting this edit to the talk page? Petrus4 ( talk) 06:05, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
"Eighteenth century/ Enlightenment (both Voltaire and Thomas Jefferson are occasionally quoted) Atheism is strongly prevalent among Slashdot's core audience, as are (particularly among Linux users) political tendencies towards various forms of Communism; however accusations of the latter will generally both cause offense and be strenuously (if dishonestly) denied. The site's core audience was originally highly intellectual in nature, but with the advent of the 4chan/World of Warcraft forum subculture in recent years, this characteristic has lessened." The increasingly outrageous uncited comments in this paragraph seem to be a joke, as the next. I regret editing this out, because the it's rather clever and well-thought out. But... Tumacama ( talk) 16:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
The ongoing assumption that Slashdot is Linux-oriented comes from historical reasons (e.g. Slashdot's parent company, or should I say corporate overlord which might be more apt in /. lingo, is
SourceForge, Inc who used to run the
Linux.com domain) and from its famous
Bill Gates "
Borg" icon
[1], as well as the strong anti-Microsoft postings often made by Slashdot members. Despite this reputation, a significant number of Slashdot stories are related to Windows
video games or applications, or Microsoft security bulletins.
citation needed
Slashdot was Linux-oriented from the beginning (and was a preference of the site's founders) Before acquisition by Andover.net. The site's coverage of Microsoft issues does not belong in Audience section, even if citation is found
Tumacama (
talk) 16:26, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
References
This article may meet the sourcing requirements for GA, but the grammar is not very good. Who was the editor who decided a comma was needed before any quotation? This is not correct. I do not have time to proof this article myself, but someone should reduce the comma overload before the article is reviewed for GA. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Reviewer: – MuZemike 00:26, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
On hold pending improvements from what's noted above. Otherwise, good work, especially on the sourcing. – MuZemike 00:26, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Failed – after 10 days of nothing being done, and I think that's long enough. This can be renominated, or someone can let me know if anyone wishes to address the issues above. –
MuZemike 22:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
On hold pending the image improvements. I'll take a second look at the prose (as I'm just now looking at them again and recalling and taking a second look), but it looks like they're all addressed. The verifiability issues look addressed. – MuZemike 16:02, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Passed – everything looks good and all issues have been addressed or explained adequately. Good work. –
MuZemike 15:08, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Should we mention that Opera has an integrated feature that typing in the adressbar /. you automatic get to http://slashdot.org ? mabdul 17:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
As of today (31 August 2010) it seems that slashdot might be offline, or going offline. Most of the pages are either not accessible or are returning "unexpected end of file" errors. There have been talks of coming layoffs of current slashdot staff as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.79.62.75 ( talk) 14:22, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Slashdot readers were once tricked by enticing-sounding links into being Goatse'd, until Slashdot changed its link rendering code to always show the target domain. I've added that, with citation, to the chronological history, between 2002 & 2005(when the cited source was published). -- Lexein ( talk) 04:41, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Where is the old article on Slashdot Trolling. It now redirects to this article, and it isn't even mentioned. Slashdot, along with Usenet are really the beginning of the whole trolling phenomena, and early in slashdots life it was known as the most 'important' trolling target on the net (being the origin of such troll memes as "first post" and the like). Can whoever decided that this was a good idea please revoke that. It was a good article, and an important record of what was a pretty important sociological phenomena 121.45.228.220 ( talk) 02:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I just finished cleaning up a lot of the primary sources. I removed the ones that verified trivial information (what the third most popular article is/was, etc.), added a few citations to the more important information, and tagged the information that only cited slashdot.org links with {{ better source}}. It's on its way to becoming a featured article, in my opinion! LiteralKa ( talk) 23:41, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
It should be noted that LiteralKa was recently banned indefinitely from editing Wikipedia due to trolling, sockpuppetry, and possible connections to the GNAA. Therefore, any edits made by this account, or comments, should be taken with a huge grain of salt. WTF? ( talk) 19:42, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Hope I didn't tread on anyone's toes. Feel free to keep editing, or discuss aspects here. WykiP ( talk) 04:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Do not lecture me about "edit warring" policy, which is something you apparently know little about. "Current affairs" websites and TV shows are about just that "current affairs", involving politics primarily. Slashdot is clearly not about that. It's about technology. Removing information about the owner of Slashdot is also detrimental to the article as it should be clearly put in the article. Simply stating, "News stories about science and technology are submitted by users who also collaboratively highlight the most valuable comments." is FAR TOO GENERAL and not even a complete statement about what the website is about! 90% of wikipedia readers only even read the lead sections of articles anyway, so you NEED more details. Period.
If you can't stop editing the lead with poor writing and incorrect information, you will be continued to be reverted until you're probably going to be blocked for vandalism. WTF? ( talk) 02:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Do what you will, but I fail to see anything wrong with the lead section as-is. You appear to be attempting to fix something that isn't a problem. Perhaps it would be better to focus on one of the 4 million other articles on Wikipedia that are in need of actual improvement? WTF? ( talk) 22:51, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
According to your dictionary link for "lede": "the introductory section of a news story that is intended to entice the reader to read the full story". It should be noted here that this is an ENCYCLOPEDIA and NOT a news story. Therefore, your spelling of the word "lede" is completely incorrect and unacceptable in the context in which you used it. It should also be noted that the link also says that the first use of the "lede" spelling is 1976, further indicating that it really isn't proper English, and in fact, mere media jargon, which also has no place in a proper encyclopedia. WTF? ( talk) 04:16, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
So what exactly is wrong with this replacing the first paragraph?
Slashdot (sometimes abbreviated as /.) is a technology-related news website which bills itself as "News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters". News stories about science and technology are submitted by users who also collaboratively highlight the most valuable comments. Slashdot was founded in 1997 as a blog, Chips & Dips, by Hope College computer science student Rob Malda, also known as "Commander Taco" and classmate Jeff Bates, also known as "Hemos".
WykiP ( talk) 15:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Following a poor choice of wordings on Slashdot, someone is trolling this article changing every instance of "readers" to "audience". It is a disruptive edit tantamount to vandalism, but when I attempted to revert the changes, my own edit was reverted. A little help to make Wikipedia a better place? Huihermit ( talk) 07:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Slashcode does redirect here but no discussion of Slashdot backend (which is apparently a GPL'ed webapp) is provided in the article. Personally I am not familiar with the topic so cannot write about it, but the omission is pretty obvious. 76.119.30.87 ( talk) 19:01, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Is there the slightest shred of third-party notability for any of these sites? - David Gerard ( talk) 09:04, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Based on the Wayback Machine, it looks like todhsals moved to http://backslashdot.tumblr.com/ in 2011. However, there hasn't been a new post there since 2012. I'm not sure how (or if) to update this citation. Everdred ( talk) 16:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Slashdot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:33, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
the Slashdot article claims that Slashdot uses Slash, but the Slash article claims that Slashdot abandoned Slash long ago. Both can't be true :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.70.33.230 ( talk) 20:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Slashdot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:41, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with Slashdot's history but I found it a bit weird that subsection [ [4]] lists the original precursor "Chips & Dips" as being launched in "October 1997" and that it later became Slashdot in "September 1997", a month earlier. Whats up with that?
Friseurtermin ( talk) 11:35, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
Karma whoring. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 23#Karma whoring until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (
𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:13, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
20721. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 24#20721 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (
𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 07:28, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
Tagged as needing update, and some citation needed issues, so I'm opening a GA reassessment to see if this can be resolved. Also there are issues with unreliable sources such as Daily Kos and PR newswire. Thanks! ( t · c) buidhe 06:13, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Slashdot article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3 |
![]() | Slashdot was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do we really need to list all those people? -- TheSeer ( Talkˑ Contribs) 00:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
IMHO, we should include the murderer reference. You can't even mention Hans on slashdot without getting a ton of black humor about the "killer filesystem." 75.88.236.109 ( talk) 21:06, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
I've found reliable citations for three of the people on the list. I am unable to find good sources that meet Wikipedia's WP:RS criteria for these people, so I am moving them to the talk page for now. If a good source can be found (and not just a Slashdot user page), they can be added back with the citation, but a laundry list is really unnecessary.
The "Appearances in books" and "Appearances in popular fiction" sections are very unspecific and as such, not very useful, can anyone improve them that has access to those texts? If the site is being merely "named" or "named indirectly" or "mentioned," that's of negligible encyclopedic value. Шизомби ( talk) 04:23, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Still not sure if minor "appearances" are notable or not, so I'm leaving it for now. Anyway, The novel Cosmonaut Keep is available on Google Books. Slashdot is mentioned on p. 29: "What's with the f**king news?" someone's saying, shaking his head and blinking hard. "I can't get CNN, can't even get Slashdot..." WTF? ( talk) 15:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Can't really find anything to confirm Slashdot's mention in these two books. Moving here for further discussion. WTF? ( talk) 16:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I've removed the following entry from the 'appearances in books section:
It doesn't seem to refer to the Slashdot effect, as stated, though it's difficult to confirm, since the particular pages of interest are not available at Google Books (I guess we'll have to see if it's in the library). Anyway, I found another book that's citing it -- here. It refers to, "A capability is provided for user or peer assessment of the quality and usefulness of the supplied metadata as well as the geographic data files.[cites 'Emergence'] The system also provides a means for reaching people interested in using or contributing commons-licensed geographic data.[cites 'Linked'] WTF? ( talk) 16:13, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
The primary sources tags need to be removed. You're not going to get information on this subject from printed sources, because no other printed sources exist.
I won't do it myself, but can we at least get some discussion on this, rather than the usual tyrant simply materialising and reverting this edit to the talk page? Petrus4 ( talk) 06:05, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
"Eighteenth century/ Enlightenment (both Voltaire and Thomas Jefferson are occasionally quoted) Atheism is strongly prevalent among Slashdot's core audience, as are (particularly among Linux users) political tendencies towards various forms of Communism; however accusations of the latter will generally both cause offense and be strenuously (if dishonestly) denied. The site's core audience was originally highly intellectual in nature, but with the advent of the 4chan/World of Warcraft forum subculture in recent years, this characteristic has lessened." The increasingly outrageous uncited comments in this paragraph seem to be a joke, as the next. I regret editing this out, because the it's rather clever and well-thought out. But... Tumacama ( talk) 16:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
The ongoing assumption that Slashdot is Linux-oriented comes from historical reasons (e.g. Slashdot's parent company, or should I say corporate overlord which might be more apt in /. lingo, is
SourceForge, Inc who used to run the
Linux.com domain) and from its famous
Bill Gates "
Borg" icon
[1], as well as the strong anti-Microsoft postings often made by Slashdot members. Despite this reputation, a significant number of Slashdot stories are related to Windows
video games or applications, or Microsoft security bulletins.
citation needed
Slashdot was Linux-oriented from the beginning (and was a preference of the site's founders) Before acquisition by Andover.net. The site's coverage of Microsoft issues does not belong in Audience section, even if citation is found
Tumacama (
talk) 16:26, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
References
This article may meet the sourcing requirements for GA, but the grammar is not very good. Who was the editor who decided a comma was needed before any quotation? This is not correct. I do not have time to proof this article myself, but someone should reduce the comma overload before the article is reviewed for GA. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Reviewer: – MuZemike 00:26, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
On hold pending improvements from what's noted above. Otherwise, good work, especially on the sourcing. – MuZemike 00:26, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Failed – after 10 days of nothing being done, and I think that's long enough. This can be renominated, or someone can let me know if anyone wishes to address the issues above. –
MuZemike 22:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
On hold pending the image improvements. I'll take a second look at the prose (as I'm just now looking at them again and recalling and taking a second look), but it looks like they're all addressed. The verifiability issues look addressed. – MuZemike 16:02, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Passed – everything looks good and all issues have been addressed or explained adequately. Good work. –
MuZemike 15:08, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Should we mention that Opera has an integrated feature that typing in the adressbar /. you automatic get to http://slashdot.org ? mabdul 17:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
As of today (31 August 2010) it seems that slashdot might be offline, or going offline. Most of the pages are either not accessible or are returning "unexpected end of file" errors. There have been talks of coming layoffs of current slashdot staff as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.79.62.75 ( talk) 14:22, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Slashdot readers were once tricked by enticing-sounding links into being Goatse'd, until Slashdot changed its link rendering code to always show the target domain. I've added that, with citation, to the chronological history, between 2002 & 2005(when the cited source was published). -- Lexein ( talk) 04:41, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Where is the old article on Slashdot Trolling. It now redirects to this article, and it isn't even mentioned. Slashdot, along with Usenet are really the beginning of the whole trolling phenomena, and early in slashdots life it was known as the most 'important' trolling target on the net (being the origin of such troll memes as "first post" and the like). Can whoever decided that this was a good idea please revoke that. It was a good article, and an important record of what was a pretty important sociological phenomena 121.45.228.220 ( talk) 02:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I just finished cleaning up a lot of the primary sources. I removed the ones that verified trivial information (what the third most popular article is/was, etc.), added a few citations to the more important information, and tagged the information that only cited slashdot.org links with {{ better source}}. It's on its way to becoming a featured article, in my opinion! LiteralKa ( talk) 23:41, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
It should be noted that LiteralKa was recently banned indefinitely from editing Wikipedia due to trolling, sockpuppetry, and possible connections to the GNAA. Therefore, any edits made by this account, or comments, should be taken with a huge grain of salt. WTF? ( talk) 19:42, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Hope I didn't tread on anyone's toes. Feel free to keep editing, or discuss aspects here. WykiP ( talk) 04:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Do not lecture me about "edit warring" policy, which is something you apparently know little about. "Current affairs" websites and TV shows are about just that "current affairs", involving politics primarily. Slashdot is clearly not about that. It's about technology. Removing information about the owner of Slashdot is also detrimental to the article as it should be clearly put in the article. Simply stating, "News stories about science and technology are submitted by users who also collaboratively highlight the most valuable comments." is FAR TOO GENERAL and not even a complete statement about what the website is about! 90% of wikipedia readers only even read the lead sections of articles anyway, so you NEED more details. Period.
If you can't stop editing the lead with poor writing and incorrect information, you will be continued to be reverted until you're probably going to be blocked for vandalism. WTF? ( talk) 02:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Do what you will, but I fail to see anything wrong with the lead section as-is. You appear to be attempting to fix something that isn't a problem. Perhaps it would be better to focus on one of the 4 million other articles on Wikipedia that are in need of actual improvement? WTF? ( talk) 22:51, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
According to your dictionary link for "lede": "the introductory section of a news story that is intended to entice the reader to read the full story". It should be noted here that this is an ENCYCLOPEDIA and NOT a news story. Therefore, your spelling of the word "lede" is completely incorrect and unacceptable in the context in which you used it. It should also be noted that the link also says that the first use of the "lede" spelling is 1976, further indicating that it really isn't proper English, and in fact, mere media jargon, which also has no place in a proper encyclopedia. WTF? ( talk) 04:16, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
So what exactly is wrong with this replacing the first paragraph?
Slashdot (sometimes abbreviated as /.) is a technology-related news website which bills itself as "News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters". News stories about science and technology are submitted by users who also collaboratively highlight the most valuable comments. Slashdot was founded in 1997 as a blog, Chips & Dips, by Hope College computer science student Rob Malda, also known as "Commander Taco" and classmate Jeff Bates, also known as "Hemos".
WykiP ( talk) 15:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Following a poor choice of wordings on Slashdot, someone is trolling this article changing every instance of "readers" to "audience". It is a disruptive edit tantamount to vandalism, but when I attempted to revert the changes, my own edit was reverted. A little help to make Wikipedia a better place? Huihermit ( talk) 07:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Slashcode does redirect here but no discussion of Slashdot backend (which is apparently a GPL'ed webapp) is provided in the article. Personally I am not familiar with the topic so cannot write about it, but the omission is pretty obvious. 76.119.30.87 ( talk) 19:01, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Is there the slightest shred of third-party notability for any of these sites? - David Gerard ( talk) 09:04, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Based on the Wayback Machine, it looks like todhsals moved to http://backslashdot.tumblr.com/ in 2011. However, there hasn't been a new post there since 2012. I'm not sure how (or if) to update this citation. Everdred ( talk) 16:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Slashdot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:33, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
the Slashdot article claims that Slashdot uses Slash, but the Slash article claims that Slashdot abandoned Slash long ago. Both can't be true :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.70.33.230 ( talk) 20:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Slashdot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:41, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with Slashdot's history but I found it a bit weird that subsection [ [4]] lists the original precursor "Chips & Dips" as being launched in "October 1997" and that it later became Slashdot in "September 1997", a month earlier. Whats up with that?
Friseurtermin ( talk) 11:35, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
Karma whoring. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 23#Karma whoring until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (
𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:13, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
20721. The discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 24#20721 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (
𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 07:28, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
Tagged as needing update, and some citation needed issues, so I'm opening a GA reassessment to see if this can be resolved. Also there are issues with unreliable sources such as Daily Kos and PR newswire. Thanks! ( t · c) buidhe 06:13, 10 July 2021 (UTC)