1,320
edits
Talk:RationalWikiWiki: Difference between revisions
→Controversial?: timescales
(→Controversial?: timescales) |
|||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
:::: Um, yes I have seen the "history" for the RationalWikiWiki page. The only edit in three weeks was [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=RationalWikiWiki&diff=70142&oldid=69008 this one] fixing a tiny grammatical error. Not very controversial. [[User:Rpeh|rpeh]] 12:08, 10 September 2009 (EDT) | :::: Um, yes I have seen the "history" for the RationalWikiWiki page. The only edit in three weeks was [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=RationalWikiWiki&diff=70142&oldid=69008 this one] fixing a tiny grammatical error. Not very controversial. [[User:Rpeh|rpeh]] 12:08, 10 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::::: I agree that this page is, in September 2009, "Not very controversial." | |||
::::: If this article continues to slowly improve at the rate of one edit every week or so, then the "protection" should expire before the next person tries to improve it. | |||
::::: However, since the history page shows back-and-forth bickering a few months ago, I wouldn't say there is "nothing" controversial about it. | |||
::::: I am fascinated by the way different wiki seem to run on different timescales. The biggest wiki run amazingly fast -- an edit I make there is often responded to within minutes; a week ago was ancient history. The WikiIndex (with the exception of a certain prolific poster), like most wiki, runs at a much slower pace -- my edits are often the latest edit to a page for weeks; a year ago was ancient history. The original wiki seems even slower. My edits there are often the latest edit to a page for years. Many people claim the original wiki, and perhaps some other wiki, exists in a kind of eternal "WikiNow" ([[Wiki: WikiNow]]). --[[User:DavidCary|DavidCary]] 13:24, 10 September 2009 (EDT) | |||
==Move to article page - vote== | ==Move to article page - vote== | ||