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 03:00, 4 September 2009
, 4 September 2009→Put a comparisons of wikis section in the RationalWiki article
(→Put a comparisons of wikis section in the RationalWiki article: guess this doesn't really matter) |
|||
| Line 371: | Line 371: | ||
:::::::Yeah so then I move it there for you and you whisper to the authorities that I'm traumatizing the talk pages. I aaaaint [[User_talk:Lumenos#Reordering_talk_page_comments|falling for that one again, buddy]]. Maybe what I should do is go create a section there, on an unrelated topic so everyone will want to post this information there. Then I'll use the super-safe strikeout to strike out the section/topic name so it will no longer be false at least. It is just impossible to create a debate map with you people. But that's how you like it isn't it? :P Uumm that having been said, I don't mean you Bob, you might be all for debate maps, who knows? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 12:24, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | :::::::Yeah so then I move it there for you and you whisper to the authorities that I'm traumatizing the talk pages. I aaaaint [[User_talk:Lumenos#Reordering_talk_page_comments|falling for that one again, buddy]]. Maybe what I should do is go create a section there, on an unrelated topic so everyone will want to post this information there. Then I'll use the super-safe strikeout to strike out the section/topic name so it will no longer be false at least. It is just impossible to create a debate map with you people. But that's how you like it isn't it? :P Uumm that having been said, I don't mean you Bob, you might be all for debate maps, who knows? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 12:24, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::::::Frankly, I think it needs to re-define itself and after it has done that this question should be re-addressed.--[[User:Bob M|Bob M]] 06:18, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | ::::::Frankly, I think it needs to re-define itself and after it has done that this question should be re-addressed.--[[User:Bob M|Bob M]] 06:18, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::::::::Well I think you are straying from the topic but, do you believe it doesn't fit the "official" definition (or inclusion policy) or rather that there is no official definition (inclusion policy)? There is an exclusion policy. Try writing about abortion. You can't even criticize abortion (or answer critics) at [[Wikinfo]]. Sometimes it all looks like one big wiggerpedia to me. Uhh with everyone wiggin' out, you know? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:00, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
:::::::What question? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 12:30, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | :::::::What question? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 12:30, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::::::::My original question in the <s>'''original section''' from where you moved this whole thing</s> in the section titled "What is Liberapedia about anyway". Perhaps all this rearranging has left you a bit confused? [[User:Nx|Nx]] 14:12, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | ::::::::My original question in the <s>'''original section''' from where you moved this whole thing</s> in the section titled "What is Liberapedia about anyway". Perhaps all this rearranging has left you a bit confused? [[User:Nx|Nx]] 14:12, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
| Line 381: | Line 382: | ||
:::::::::Couldn't we make a template or something that is the chart of a bunch of similar wikis, and then put that on all of their pages? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 18:48, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | :::::::::Couldn't we make a template or something that is the chart of a bunch of similar wikis, and then put that on all of their pages? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 18:48, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::::::::::No it would be easier to copy the table, then we could make it more customized. That is, if we have consensus on this proposal. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 06:09, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | ::::::::::No it would be easier to copy the table, then we could make it more customized. That is, if we have consensus on this proposal. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 06:09, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:::::::::::Okay so we could start with just this wiki, since there doesn't seem to be any opposition on this point and Nx says "Okaaay..." [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:00, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
==On what features or qualities should we compare any wikis (or these wikis in particular)?== | |||
Any suggestions as to how we might compare all these similar wikis? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:00, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
:The license. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:00, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
:The inclusion policy. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:00, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
::Which opinions do they allow to be expressed, if any? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:00, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
:::"Officially" [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:00, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
:::"In actual practice" [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:00, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
:User review ratings. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:00, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
:Multiple categories for the subjects they cover. For example? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:00, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
==Should [[A Storehouse of Knowledge]] (ASK) be included as a Similar Wiki or in a comparison table?== | |||
I think [[A Storehouse of Knowledge]] ought to be included. It is represented in the criticism section, but being that it seems to be administrated better than [[Conservapedia]] (which isn't saying much) it does have that in common with RationalWiki. They are both alternatives or offshoots of Conservapedia. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:00, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | |||