Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-01-24/News and notes


 * New wiki encyclopedia project, Epistemia—either a dedicated story or part of News and Notes.
 * Blatant self-promotion and completely non-notable. Every attempt by the creator, Thomas H. Larsen, to have this project linked to in the Community Portal has been reverted, even going back so far as to when the project was referred to as Wikipendium. Both the Community Portal and the Signpost are designed to highlight issues that are notable and relevant to the Wikipedia community. Epistemia is neither. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 02:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "Blatant self-promotion" and "completely non-notable"? Epistemia is not yet notable, but it is of relevance and interest to the general community (at least in my humble opinion), especially in light of the reasonably positive reception on the WikiEN-L mailing list. A News and Notes entry would probably be most appropriate, though, especially since the project is very small at this time. – Thomas H. Larsen 05:58, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I see Phoebe's mentioned it at User:Phoebe/signpost012409. At any rate, I'll let her decide what is appropriate and what's not. A comparison to Scholarpedia and Veropedia is inaccurate, though. – Thomas H. Larsen 06:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I see no need for another Wikipedia hate site, nor for it to be advertised here. At alas, I'm not a writer for the Post. §hep   •  Talk  06:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * As I'm sure Thomas Larsen will tell you, Epistemia is hardly intended as a Wikipedia hate site. I don't think it merits a separate article, but I think it's worth mentioning in News and notes, just as the Signpost has covered other wiki projects that attempt to overcome flaws of or fill niches unfilled by Wikipedia.  But you're certainly welcome to write for the Signpost, Shep.--ragesoss (talk) 06:29, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Epistemia is hardly a Wikipedia hate site—consider it an encyclopedia that aims to address Wikipedia's many flaws. – Thomas H. Larsen 00:56, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I was away when the above was discussed. 1) I think any fork of the English Wikipedia is notable enough for a note in News and Notes, when it's done with intent and addressed to the community, as I think it's interesting to see how our community treats forks over time. 2) I wish that the mention of scholarpedia, veropedia, et al had stayed in; regardless of what you think of them, Thomas, they are other encyclopedia projects that have used a Wikipedia model or content. I'm looking at the situation holistically here. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 07:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * oh, and ps. -- the phrasing "New wiki encyclopedia project, Epistemia—either a dedicated story or part of News and Notes" was just a note to myself on the draft page to include it somewhere! And shouldn't be taken as more than that. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 07:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome to add them back; I won't do so, though. The trouble is that Scholarpedia and Veropedia are completely different from Epistemia in many ways: Scholarpedia invites editors, Epistemia doesn't specifically do so; Veropedia takes Wikipedia's best content and copyedits it, Epistemia doesn't specifically do so either. Comparisons to Wikipedia and Citizendium are significantly more appropriate in my opinion.


 * Thanks for writing about Epistemia. – Thomas H. Larsen 00:06, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Barack Obama page views
This tool does not count redirects as I understand it. You have to add page view for each redirect to his page to get the true total.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:41, 31 January 2009 (UTC)