1,136
edits
Talk:RationalWiki (en)/Archive2: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Talk:RationalWiki (en)/Archive2 (view source)
Revision as of 10:05, 3 September 2009
, 3 September 2009→Similar wikis: added bold emphasis and explanation
(→Similar wikis: added bold emphasis and explanation) |
|||
| Line 165: | Line 165: | ||
== Similar wikis == | == Similar wikis == | ||
Please place or move arguments here for what makes a wiki notable and similar enough to RationalWiki, to be included in the "See also" section. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] | '''''Please place or move arguments here''''' for what makes a wiki notable and similar enough to RationalWiki, to be included in the "See also" section. '''''[Added bold and italic emphasis to the preceding statement. Some editors may have missed that, since the section grew. I apologize for [[User_talk:Lumenos#Reordering_talk_page_comments|not anticipating this]] (it is rather humorous in my view but I'm sorry if it caused anyone frustration, or if they feel any damage cannot be repaired). [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 06:05, 3 September 2009 (EDT)]''''' | ||
What criteria will include these: | What criteria will include these: | ||
| Line 195: | Line 195: | ||
===Arguments that Liberapedia (or certain descriptions) should be included (rebuttals welcome)=== | ===Arguments that Liberapedia (or certain descriptions) should be included (rebuttals welcome)=== | ||
(Please indent rebuttal's and place them under the argument in favor. Only bullet arguments favoring the inclusion of Liberpedia info. '''I'm moving editors posts and making this like an outline, if no one minds. '''[[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 08:23, 31 August 2009 (EDT)) [ | (Please indent rebuttal's and place them under the argument in favor. Only bullet arguments favoring the inclusion of Liberpedia info. '''''I'm moving editors posts and making this like an outline, if no one minds. '''''[[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 08:23, 31 August 2009 (EDT)) '''''[Added bold and italic emphasis to the preceding statement. Some editors may have missed that, since the section grew. I apologize for [[User_talk:Lumenos#Reordering_talk_page_comments|not anticipating this]] (it is rather humorous in my view but I'm sorry if it caused anyone frustration, or if they feel any damage cannot be repaired). [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 06:05, 3 September 2009 (EDT)]''''' | ||
*They both devote a great deal of attention to Conservapedia. (Posted by [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]]) | *They both devote a great deal of attention to Conservapedia. (Posted by [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]]) | ||
| Line 227: | Line 227: | ||
===Arguments that Liberapedia (or certain descriptions) should NOT be included (rebuttals welcome)=== | ===Arguments that Liberapedia (or certain descriptions) should NOT be included (rebuttals welcome)=== | ||
(Please indent rebuttal's and place them under the argument. Only bullet arguments opposing the inclusion of Liberpedia info. I'm moving editors posts and making this like an outline, if no one minds. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 08:23, 31 August 2009 (EDT)) | (Please indent rebuttal's and place them under the argument. Only bullet arguments opposing the inclusion of Liberpedia info. '''I'm moving editors posts and making this like an outline, if no one minds.''' [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 08:23, 31 August 2009 (EDT))'''''[Added bold and italic emphasis to the preceding statement. Some editors may have missed that, since the section grew. I apologize for [[User_talk:Lumenos#Reordering_talk_page_comments|not anticipating this]] (it is rather humorous in my view but I'm sorry if it caused anyone frustration, or if they feel any damage cannot be repaired). [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 06:05, 3 September 2009 (EDT)]''''' | ||
*If LP devotes a lot of time to CP this information should be in the LP article and the CP article. It is not, of itself, an argument for it to be in the RW article.--[[User:Bob M|Bob M]] 05:28, 31 August 2009 (EDT) | *If LP devotes a lot of time to CP this information should be in the LP article and the CP article. It is not, of itself, an argument for it to be in the RW article.--[[User:Bob M|Bob M]] 05:28, 31 August 2009 (EDT) | ||