Wikisage, the free encyclopedia of the second generation, is digital heritage
User talk:Guido den Broeder: Difference between revisions
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
:Some promotional activities are to be expected from next year onward, after the Stichting Paraduin has been activated. | :Some promotional activities are to be expected from next year onward, after the Stichting Paraduin has been activated. | ||
:We are not a Wikipedia copycat though. Instead of popularity, we aim for quality. This is a long process that will span many generations. We are also not tied to the pornographic industry, like Wikipedia's mr. Wales. That doesn't mean the topic of sexuality has no place here, but it must be handled with care. Keep in mind that not all readers are adults. Regards, [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|talk]]) 23:14, 21 October 2015 (CEST) | :We are not a Wikipedia copycat though. Instead of popularity, we aim for quality. This is a long process that will span many generations. We are also not tied to the pornographic industry, like Wikipedia's mr. Wales. That doesn't mean the topic of sexuality has no place here, but it must be handled with care. Keep in mind that not all readers are adults. Regards, [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|talk]]) 23:14, 21 October 2015 (CEST) | ||
::Of course, will try to do. My view is that articles should be informative enough but at the same time not every topic needs visual illustration. Wikipedia editors seem to want to have a picture with every article even when the topic is pretty easy to imagine without such. [[User:Biofase|Biofase]] [[User_talk:Biofase|<sup style="color:red">flame</sup>]]|[[Special:Contributions/Biofase|<small style="background-color:black;color:white"> stalk </small>]] 21:19, 4 December 2015 (CET) | |||
== Seksualiteit == | == Seksualiteit == | ||
Revision as of 20:19, 4 December 2015
| User | Talk | Edits | Pinboard | Tools | Articles | Essays |
Way forward
So what are the plans for this site? Will it be more widely promoted to grow and become popular? Funny that a site usually either dies or becomes popular but it seems this one goes up and down. Will like to see it become a good alternative for wikipedia.
I've been waiting to do some sexuality articles but didn't want them to dominate the site while it's still small so that people get the wrong idea but in other thoughts it may just get more people interested in it as well. So don't know what to do. Wikipedia isn't exactly friendly towards such articles. Not censorship or anything but their no original research policy makes it difficult as there's not a lot of tertiary sources for such information. Then there's also the merge brigade who wants there to be as few articles as possible. Managed to get a a whole article merged into another where there was substantially less info on the subject just because they considered the topics too closely related. Made me really angry. Biofase flame| stalk 19:00, 10 October 2015 (CEST)
- Some promotional activities are to be expected from next year onward, after the Stichting Paraduin has been activated.
- We are not a Wikipedia copycat though. Instead of popularity, we aim for quality. This is a long process that will span many generations. We are also not tied to the pornographic industry, like Wikipedia's mr. Wales. That doesn't mean the topic of sexuality has no place here, but it must be handled with care. Keep in mind that not all readers are adults. Regards, Guido den Broeder (talk) 23:14, 21 October 2015 (CEST)
- Of course, will try to do. My view is that articles should be informative enough but at the same time not every topic needs visual illustration. Wikipedia editors seem to want to have a picture with every article even when the topic is pretty easy to imagine without such. Biofase flame| stalk 21:19, 4 December 2015 (CET)
Seksualiteit
De artikelen van de seksualiteit voor nu moeten verschijnen als gebruiker / Blog is er al een die geen bronnen heeft, is misschien wel het proces R C Peña
- Wikisage offers two ways of dealing with a topic: articles (which should be neutral) and essays. Regards, Guido den Broeder (talk) 23:17, 21 October 2015 (CEST)
- Didn't get all of that but his problem seems to be that there's no sources. As I said sources for these articles are rather hard to come by, why they aren't particularly wikipedia friendly. So can we get some clarification on the difference between an article and an essay? Lack of sources don't automatically make an article non-neutral just like sources won't make it neutral, but it's now been marked as an essay. Biofase flame| stalk 21:16, 4 December 2015 (CET)
template metadata
Guido misschien een interpretatie / aanpassing van de template metadata ontbreekt in de wikipedia Engels editie.--Penarc (talk) 15:29, 31 October 2015 (CET)