This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
So, what do we think of this? Personally, I have to say it feels very low on content, as though we're stretching to find things to say about compendia. But I'm open to hearing other perspectives. Jwrosenzweig 17:38, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I didn't actually stretch for content at all in making it. There were components of compendium that wikipedia brought up that needed to be resolved so I added them as headings. As a side effect, I proved that even what you would think is a simple definition can have sublevels. Bensaccount 17:55, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Other sublevels of compendium:
I found most of the article to be incomprehensible and deleted large parts. Unless someone feels compelled to improve this, the article should eventually be deleted and wikilinks to compendium should become wiktionary links. Lambiam 11:01, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Should this page mention that Wikipedia is a "megacompendium"? -- Escape Artist Swyer Talk to me The mess I've made 00:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
-- 222.64.219.102 ( talk) 07:14, 3 March 2010 (UTC) by Rekawt Omar Barznjy by Rekawt Omar Barznjy by Rekawt Omar Barznjy by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
-- 222.67.201.249 ( talk) 04:34, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.67.201.249 ( talk) 04:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC) by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.126.99.36 ( talk) 19:48, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Greetings,
A bit different topic. We all know Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. While every 11 January Wikipedia adds up one more year to it's age, encyclopedias and Compendiums too add up a year more to their much longer history.
When did you last visited wikipedia articles Encyclopedia Compendium and History of encyclopedias? What is their status ? When I visited those the last two are tagged for lack citations. In Encyclopedia#Characteristics section too almost six paragraphs are missing in citations.
Does this supposed to concerns women? May be and may not be, depends how one looks at it. At minimum as most in this project focus largely on biographies may be biographies of women who contributed to Encyclopedias and Compendiums may interest. Personally, I do see it one more angle, some of contributors may be facing hurdles of some strange Wikipedia rules and in course of time internalizing them, what was participation of women in forming all those rules ? Whether all of them are logical and fair enough to women? or few of them are avoidable hurdles? If one works on the topic then handling systemic biases will become easier? If no one worked on the topic then that is good opportunity to work on.
Actually one anon IP helped with a list of sources too on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. If topic interests some one following is list of sources with which one can support the articles.
Any takers for the task?
Thanks and warm regards
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
So, what do we think of this? Personally, I have to say it feels very low on content, as though we're stretching to find things to say about compendia. But I'm open to hearing other perspectives. Jwrosenzweig 17:38, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I didn't actually stretch for content at all in making it. There were components of compendium that wikipedia brought up that needed to be resolved so I added them as headings. As a side effect, I proved that even what you would think is a simple definition can have sublevels. Bensaccount 17:55, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Other sublevels of compendium:
I found most of the article to be incomprehensible and deleted large parts. Unless someone feels compelled to improve this, the article should eventually be deleted and wikilinks to compendium should become wiktionary links. Lambiam 11:01, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Should this page mention that Wikipedia is a "megacompendium"? -- Escape Artist Swyer Talk to me The mess I've made 00:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
-- 222.64.219.102 ( talk) 07:14, 3 March 2010 (UTC) by Rekawt Omar Barznjy by Rekawt Omar Barznjy by Rekawt Omar Barznjy by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
-- 222.67.201.249 ( talk) 04:34, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.67.201.249 ( talk) 04:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC) by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy
by Rekawt Omar Barznjy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.126.99.36 ( talk) 19:48, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Greetings,
A bit different topic. We all know Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. While every 11 January Wikipedia adds up one more year to it's age, encyclopedias and Compendiums too add up a year more to their much longer history.
When did you last visited wikipedia articles Encyclopedia Compendium and History of encyclopedias? What is their status ? When I visited those the last two are tagged for lack citations. In Encyclopedia#Characteristics section too almost six paragraphs are missing in citations.
Does this supposed to concerns women? May be and may not be, depends how one looks at it. At minimum as most in this project focus largely on biographies may be biographies of women who contributed to Encyclopedias and Compendiums may interest. Personally, I do see it one more angle, some of contributors may be facing hurdles of some strange Wikipedia rules and in course of time internalizing them, what was participation of women in forming all those rules ? Whether all of them are logical and fair enough to women? or few of them are avoidable hurdles? If one works on the topic then handling systemic biases will become easier? If no one worked on the topic then that is good opportunity to work on.
Actually one anon IP helped with a list of sources too on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. If topic interests some one following is list of sources with which one can support the articles.
Any takers for the task?
Thanks and warm regards