This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The RFC for TAFI is nearing it's conclusion, and it's time to hammer out the details over at the project's talk page. There are several details of the project that would do well with wider input and participation, such as the article nomination and selection process, the amount and type of articles displayed, the implementation on the main page and other things. I would like to invite you to comment there if you continue to be interested in TAFI's development. -- Nick Penguin( contribs) 02:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
I see that you are a member of Wikiproject Venezuela and I had some questions about sources. I posted this on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard and I haven't gotten any responses. Can you help? Justiciero1811 ( talk) 23:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
I had decided to give up on this conversation since it didn't seem like anything I was saying was having any affect on your opinion. However, the suicide of Aaron Swartz has left me deeply upset and I feel compelled to make one more statement. While I have acknowledged that some WMF folks made overly emotional claims about SOPA, and perhaps exaggerated the direct impact it would have on Wikipedia, I ask you to seriously consider the possibility that there were 3 sides to the SOPA debate: media corporate interests, search engine corporate interests, and grassroots internet activists (of which Aaron Swartz was an important part). Yes, there was overlap and cooperation between the two anti-SOPA factions, but Google did not control the fight against SOPA (as the media companies would like for you to believe). Whether you agree with it or not, there are many people who believe that SOPA was bad legislation that did not balance corporate and public interests, did not provide adequate protections against misuse, and created a dangerous precedent for internet censorship (regardless of its effects on search engines or media companies). I'm proud of the work that I did on the issue, and hope that it will be remembered as something other than the bidding of Google. Personally, I believe that Google long ago abandoned it's motto of "Do no evil", but adversity makes strange bedfellows. Even though Aaron is gone, the fight to keep the internet free will go on without him, and I hope that you will consider being part of that fight (on the side of public interest). We need people like you that call bullshit on misinformation (from either side) and keep the dialog honest. When the next fight happens, Google might not be on our side, so we need all the help we can get. Kaldari ( talk) 20:26, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi there! I invite you to participate in the request for comment on Talk:La Luz del Mundo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! Ajaxfiore ( talk) 17:57, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!
Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 18:27, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the disruption but apparently the email bot failed. We'll resend the codes this week. (note: If you were notified directly that your email preferences were not enabled, you still need to contact Ocaasi). Cheers, User:Ocaasi 21:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Check your email. Enjoy! Ocaasi t | c 21:42, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Greetings, I was reading your draft piece covering the Bicholim conflict hoax on Wikipedia and found it fascinating. Too bad there is no evidence that any individual was ever actually "hoaxed" by the article, which makes it pretty poor as a hoax! I am sure there are many more "hoaxes" like this out there, I've found a few over the years and never really saw a reason to worry much. Now, if someone could create something like Sideways vagina and make it stick on Wikipedia, that would be what I actually deem to be a hoax, and would be impressive. Well, I guess my 2 cents doesn't change anything in your good article, good work.-- Milowent • has spoken 17:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The RFC for TAFI is nearing it's conclusion, and it's time to hammer out the details over at the project's talk page. There are several details of the project that would do well with wider input and participation, such as the article nomination and selection process, the amount and type of articles displayed, the implementation on the main page and other things. I would like to invite you to comment there if you continue to be interested in TAFI's development. -- Nick Penguin( contribs) 02:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
I see that you are a member of Wikiproject Venezuela and I had some questions about sources. I posted this on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard and I haven't gotten any responses. Can you help? Justiciero1811 ( talk) 23:52, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
I had decided to give up on this conversation since it didn't seem like anything I was saying was having any affect on your opinion. However, the suicide of Aaron Swartz has left me deeply upset and I feel compelled to make one more statement. While I have acknowledged that some WMF folks made overly emotional claims about SOPA, and perhaps exaggerated the direct impact it would have on Wikipedia, I ask you to seriously consider the possibility that there were 3 sides to the SOPA debate: media corporate interests, search engine corporate interests, and grassroots internet activists (of which Aaron Swartz was an important part). Yes, there was overlap and cooperation between the two anti-SOPA factions, but Google did not control the fight against SOPA (as the media companies would like for you to believe). Whether you agree with it or not, there are many people who believe that SOPA was bad legislation that did not balance corporate and public interests, did not provide adequate protections against misuse, and created a dangerous precedent for internet censorship (regardless of its effects on search engines or media companies). I'm proud of the work that I did on the issue, and hope that it will be remembered as something other than the bidding of Google. Personally, I believe that Google long ago abandoned it's motto of "Do no evil", but adversity makes strange bedfellows. Even though Aaron is gone, the fight to keep the internet free will go on without him, and I hope that you will consider being part of that fight (on the side of public interest). We need people like you that call bullshit on misinformation (from either side) and keep the dialog honest. When the next fight happens, Google might not be on our side, so we need all the help we can get. Kaldari ( talk) 20:26, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi there! I invite you to participate in the request for comment on Talk:La Luz del Mundo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! Ajaxfiore ( talk) 17:57, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email!
Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 18:27, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for the disruption but apparently the email bot failed. We'll resend the codes this week. (note: If you were notified directly that your email preferences were not enabled, you still need to contact Ocaasi). Cheers, User:Ocaasi 21:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Check your email. Enjoy! Ocaasi t | c 21:42, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Greetings, I was reading your draft piece covering the Bicholim conflict hoax on Wikipedia and found it fascinating. Too bad there is no evidence that any individual was ever actually "hoaxed" by the article, which makes it pretty poor as a hoax! I am sure there are many more "hoaxes" like this out there, I've found a few over the years and never really saw a reason to worry much. Now, if someone could create something like Sideways vagina and make it stick on Wikipedia, that would be what I actually deem to be a hoax, and would be impressive. Well, I guess my 2 cents doesn't change anything in your good article, good work.-- Milowent • has spoken 17:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)