Talk:Wikipedia

From Wikiquote
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Why are the quotes here so positive? Yeah there's some negative stuff but shouldn't there be more complaining? User:70.92.93.51

Feel free to add negative quotes. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 14:51, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

why not to share good things[edit]

well! it's a terrific place to find a collection of variety of stuff? tell good links if anybody has got

—This unsigned comment is by Shakeel candid (talkcontribs) .

Well I believe Wikiquote is so much better than Wikipedia. The rules are to strict on wikipedia! I mean this admin bans me for creaing a new account just because I forgot my other account's password and did not provide any email-address details. Please don't comment on my comment.

Unsourced[edit]

Wikiquote no longer allows unsourced quotations, and they are in process of being removed from our pages (see Wikiquote:Limits on quotations); but if you can provide a reliable and precise source for any quote on this list please move it to Wikipedia.

  • Ban Wikipedia youth is like forbidding rock and roll.
  • The problem about Wikipedia is that it just works in reality, not in theory.
  • Possibly the greatest idea of the Computer Age.
    • BritishWebWorld magazine
  • The real problem is not Wikipedia, but reporters who fail to check their facts.
  • At last, an encyclopedia by potheads!
  • The big secret of course is that Wikipedia is not really about an encyclopedia, it's just a big game of nomic.
  • We don't know how many unique users visit the site because we're lame and don't keep track of it - we don't sell advertising, so we don't have to.
  • Our mission is to document human knowledge, no matter how unpleasant or offensive it may be to some people.
  • Wikipedia functions much like an iceberg: for every page of supposedly factual information one sees peeking out, hidden below are countless thousands of pages on debate, argument, and vandalism.
  • The best thing about Wikipedia is that you can make up your own information to put on it!
    • David Smith
  • Wikipedia:The Yoda of the Internet!
    • Katy Chase in "In The Real World" (www.intherealworld.moonfruit.com)
  • With Wikipedia, everyone can read anything anyone wrote on everything!
    • Unknown source
  • I love Wikipedia. It's the first place I go when I'm looking for knowledge, or when I want to create some.
  • I love Wikipedia. Any site that's got a longer entry on "truthiness" than on Lutherans has its priorities straight.

The notability of a collection of quotations from women on why they don't edit Wikipedia.[edit]

Several of the quotes mentioned in this blog come from news paper articles, while others are from internet forums, though I'm curious if anyone here would be considered noteworthy enough critic of wikipedia to include on it's page an thought it better to discuss before making additions that may be seen as questionable. CensoredScribe (talk) 17:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia can only accept what other people have written before. That can be a problem because you can have experiences but they will not be accepted unless someone has published them before. Why some people get a bio on wikipedia and others are not considered notable - who knows. Maybe it is just militarism where hundreds of WWI pilots get a mentioning but an artist does not.
Why they put in this ""This user has made a public declaration indicating that they have a conflict of interest with regard to the following Wikipedia article(s):"" is a mystery because I know that the person in question (a relative) certainly did not put anything on that "everybody wiki" page, having no registration to put anything on there. It is also not on wikipedia as that person seems to think. I let my editing registration lapse; it was not a give and take situation of the two way kind. (Almuth Hauptmann-Gurski) 2001:8003:A070:7F00:3C90:C84A:F323:93FB 04:11, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]