Wikisage, the free encyclopedia of the second generation, is digital heritage

User talk:Peter jackson

From Wikisage
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Hello Peter jackson, most welcome to the English-language Wikisage!
Wikisage is a free encyclopedia, to which everyone can contribute. We are looking forward to your input.
Information about the use of Wikisage can a.o. be found through the portals Help, Community and Wikisage. If you have any questions, you can always visit the helpdesk.
Each user has a personal talk page, like this one. If someone writes here, you are alerted by an orange bar. Each article has a talk page as well. Sign your messages on talk pages and discussion pages like the helpdesk by putting four tildes ~. Your username and the time of writing will then be added automatically. You can also use the second button from the right above the editing window.
There is a waiting time of 48 hours before you can start editing. You also need to confirm your email address first (see 'my preferences').

Enjoy! Guido den Broeder 23:08, 29 March 2012 (CEST)


now, Mr Hangkok (the 1st pic of the gallery) does not belong to Briton (citizens)?--Penarc (talk) 14:43, 26 February 2017 (CET)

I haven't heard of him as far as I recall, but Scotland is part of the United Kingdom, so he's probably British. Peter jackson (talk) 14:58, 26 February 2017 (CET)

Forum talk:Management

Hi! Sorry to add this here, but I follow the goings-on at Citizendium and this is the place where I can get in touch with one of its main editors.

Out of curiosity, I've followed the Citizendium discussion about ways to improve Citizendium's position as a wiki. (Sorry that I've asked here, but I don't have a CZ account.) I think what's important to remember was that while Larry Sanger was an editor at CZ, simply his presence helped get the website a lot of publicity; but once he left, so did many other contributors, and the project has since lost most of its editors.

What every wiki needs is different. At Wikipedia, I think that more individual attention and cooperation is necessary for the website to do significantly better than it's doing currently; at this wiki, I think more original articles about important topics are needed, and at CZ, it's hard to say but I think more contributors more regularly adding new content would be extremely important.

I've noticed before in comments on CZ a statement (I believe by you) saying that the website needs to cut down on pseudoscience, but unfortunately I don't know where that content is on the wiki, so I can't give my thoughts. I just think that, in the discussion currently at CZ, the above may work well as some ideas to mention there. But whatever you think is best.

--SelfieCity (talk|contributions) 00:48, 13 April 2019 (CEST)

Nice to see someone's interested.
Contributors have been disappearing from CZ for a variety of reasons for a long time now. Larry's phasing out is one of them. One can't really say how many there still are as quite a number of people just pop in occasionally.
People were saying that about pseudoscience a long time ago. I agreed with that & may well have said so. It's also a permanent fixture of RationalWiki's criticism of CZ.
I may well copy your comments over there. Peter jackson (talk) 11:22, 13 April 2019 (CEST)
Thanks! That may help. The CZ article on pseudoscience looks fairly straightforward, I guess, but probably pseudoscience isn't something that a wiki should focus on, let alone emphasize, since by definition it's not science. The problem is that, simply in identifying what is or isn't pseudoscience, you're basically accusing people of having false ideas. One thing I see as a problem on CZ is how some articles on current events are just not detailed enough. While the Brexit timeline is very good, a lot of other articles and current individuals are not detailed as ones about similarly important people who came before them. For example, compare CZ's article on Theresa May to the one about David Cameron or Tony Blair, or Donald Trump to Barack Obama or George W. Bush. Or even, compare the article about the 2016 U.S. presidential election to the one about the 2008 presidential election. --SelfieCity (talk|contributions) 18:06, 13 April 2019 (CEST)
That's just not having enough people. Peter jackson (talk) 14:41, 14 April 2019 (CEST)
Agreed. The challenge is that, on a wiki where naturally the number of people who will want to contribute is a minority, it's always going to be difficult to get large numbers. --SelfieCity (talk|contributions) 21:51, 14 April 2019 (CEST)