Just a note, today, English Wikipedia crossed 4 million articles
milestone. Stay up forever old buddy! :-D
\\o
o//
\o/
/o\
And today is the second day of Wikimania! Surely they have something
new to celebrate and brag about now! :-D
Regards,
Tanvir
--
Tanvir Rahman
Wikitanvir
Does anyone know of a central location for article content queries and
requests? I'm not necessarily talking about emergency fixes or
vandalism, but more subtle problems about content that may need
discussion but where it can be difficult to find people willing to
tackle the request. The reason I'm looking for something like this can
be seen in the discussion here (static page version):
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Reque…
The article talk page is almost certainly the first place to go,
followed by additional notes to the article editors and in other
locations in case no-one is watching the article. But even then, it
would be nice to have a location where such requests can be posted (or
automatically listed) to draw more attention to them and to allow
people to help answer them (similar to how the edit request template
works).
Would something like that have any chance of being useful?
Carcharoth
Or a template at the top.
'This article relies on newspaper sources...please contribute better
sources or tag with notability if you cant find any better sources.'
P.s. This offtopic thread should be on Wikipedia lists as its not about the
movement in general.
On Jul 4, 2012 6:13 PM, "Svip" <svippy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 4 July 2012 01:38, Marc A. Pelletier <marc(a)uberbox.org> wrote:
>
> > Well, if I were suddenly named dictator of Wikipedia, I'd probably
suggest
> > that a "recent event" namespace be created, where popular media were
> > acceptable sources, and make them verbotten in mainspace. Mainspace
> > articles might have a hatnote with a link to the other namespace along
the
> > lines of "for recent, less authoritative coverage".
>
> You could avoid the whole namespace issue by simply highlighting
> articles or parts of article that are based on popular media. Like
> non-canon stuff on fiction wikis. Highlight its background in blue or
> something.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
I just stumbled on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Polyplay_menu.png .
The screenshot is 511x256. According to the article, the resolution of
the screen is 512x256, which means that this is basically a full image. The
fair use template requires that images be "web resolution" and there's
boilerplate which specifically says that the resolution has been decreased
from the original. I don't think trimming 1 pixel from 512 really counts as
decreasing the resolution.
Checking other video game screenshots shows that the majority of video game
screenshots are original resolution. Most of them aren't dumb enough to
say that the resolution is decreased when it's not, but still claim that
they are "low resolution" because they are web resolution.
I would personally just choose to define "web resolution" in a common sense
way and say that the original resolution is already low, but I think this is
clearly not the intent.
I'm not going to go fixing any fair use rationales here, but this may be worth
noting as an example of a broken fair use policy.
http://www.hospitalitynet.org/news/4056585.html
I suspect we may have (how do I put this) an opportunity to be helpful
to an influx of newbies with not-so-good articles in need of
improvement.
(Is there a good place on-wiki to note such endeavours? One of the VPs?)
- d.
