hi
i was just brwsing wikipedia nad came through this about LQ

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinuxQuestions.org

now if we want LQ to be at wikipedia i thik we need to vote

one of the comment is
" if people want to know about linuxquestions.org they can visit the website itself! "

but what i think is that if some one can get a link for linux resources at wikipedia then whats wrong with it??

so what to u all suggest?

regards

Both the options are good. The website is linked from another website or the website is directly accessed. Secondly, LQ is listed in www.redhat.com, when I saw last around 5 to 6 weeks ago.

However, the thing that surprised me was that the article about linuxquestions.org is being considered for deletion.

Mr. Jermey please consider revising the article or tell me if I cud submit you an article about Linuxquestions.org

Well, there is only one vote to delete and (at the time of writing) 8 to keep it. I would suggest that the 2 things that need to be done are to vote for undeletion (or not to delete at all) and to add to the existing info - a bit of history would keep it from looking like an ad, for example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiped...xQuestions.org is the page to add your comments

I have done it. Please continue to keep the page of information about LQ on wikipedia as well.
This has grown to the best extents and I wud like to see it grow more!

yes lets do our bit to spread word about LQ!!

If there is any information needed to add to the article, I am willing to help. I'd hate to see the article deleted, but I won't vote as I am clearly biased. Thanks for bringing this to everyones attention masand.

--jeremy

I'm sorry to be the lone dissenting voice here. But I would like to see LQ.org deleted from Wikipedia.

But links to LQ.org can be posted in Linux-related article(s).

Wikipedia is an online enclyclopaedia. If LQ.org can have a page, then most sites would also want to have a page dedicated to them. What about my own website? Can I have a page dedicated to that?

Touchy issue.

My own take is that LinuxQuestions.org is not encyclopaedic content, I'm afraid. But I'm surely in favour of having external links from Wikipedia to LQ.org in Linux-related pages.

Before people start tonking me over the head for my stand on this issue, let me assure you that I am a great fan of Wikipedia as well as LQ.org.

But Wikipedia should remain a pure encyclopaedia. I detest the way in which a lot of un-encyclopaedic content has crept into wikipedia and thus diluted its content. Therefore my grouse is not against LQ.org but against the "unencyclopaedic" content that has crept into wikipedia and thus my stand is one against that, rather than aimed at LQ.org itself. I am in favour of deleting all unencyclopaedic content from wikipedia and thus free up a few resources.

As an example of encyclopaedic vs. non-encyclopaedic content, let me state that an article about Linux is truly encyclopaedic in nature while websites about Linux are not. Linux websites keep appearing and disappearing (although LQ has been around for a long time and can be said to be an exceptional case). Topics that are non-encyclopaedic can be distinguished from encyclopaedic ones as being transient in nature. That is 20 or 30 years from now, such articles may be meaningless/irrelevant. Encyclopaedic content should have some permanence and relevancy over a long period of time in human history or at least have historical value. Linux (and Operating Systems) will have a place in the history of computing and technology and will remain relevant 30 or 40 years from now. A website dedicated to it? I don't think so.

To make a long story short, Encyclopaedic content should fall under a definite category like History, Geography, Society, Science, Technology, Culture, Arts and similar subjects.

Another issue is how do you explain a particular website in an encyclopaedia without having a POV? All encyclopaedic content in wikipedia should adhere to NPOV.

Wikipedia should remain an online wiki encyclopaedia without its content being diluted in any way. I hope everybody will understand my point and realize that my long post here is not aimed at denigrating or reducing the worth of LinuxQuestions.org but just point out that wikipedia should remain an encyclopaedia.

Personally if they have policies in place to not create specific pages for actual websites, I say yank it. If not, it's their choice and I won't vote in their ongoing dispute currently since I am a Moderator of this site. Like Jeremy said, it would be biased but reading their policies, I'd probably be one of the few to say pull it, not that I don't want LQ.org to have their own page there if someone created it and took the time to populate it with information that might be beneficial, but I can see that starting a trend where every website would want their own page. I see it as no worse than allowing people to advertise here in the forums or on our wiki, which are yanked immediately due to our policies.

trickykid,

I agree with your views and I am afraid I sounded rather hostile towards LQ.org which I assure you I am not. But wikipedia is an online wiki encyclopaedia and that is my point.

I really think LQ.org would benefit a lot more by being placed as an "external link" in many Linux-related articles, rather than having a dedicated page to it.

Somehow, for a particular topic to be encyclopaedic in nature, I think three broad guidelines must be observed:

1. It adds to the total sum of current human knowledge or has specific historical value. (OR)
2. Fits into any specific encyclopaedic category/categories with overall relevance to the particular category. (OR)
3. Is "generic" enough in terms of topicality to justify its own article.

Another problem is that if you dedicate an article about a website what kind of information about LQ.org would really classify as knowledge? Would you describe the site appearance or its content. Or dwelve into its history? Does all that information really come under the definition of "knowledge"?

I believe that "how much does this article add to the pool of human knowledge?" should be the criterion of an Encyclopaedia rather than seeking to be a mere catalogue of information on non-encyclopaedic content like websites. I believe a Directory, a Catalogue or an Almanac are suited for that kind of general information.

Even if the page goes there are all of the distro pages at wikipedia.org

I put a link for LQ.org on the Fedora page at wikipedia.org not too long ago since the forum here is being sponsored by Red Hat (Fedora Project).

wikipedia has a habit of deleting things they believe are just adverts for sites when the links to sites are better suited on main venue pages or so they explained that to me.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedora_Core

If the page seems more to be an advertisement, let it remain on the page if the admin is ready to donate something to wikipedia.

OR

If it doesn't seem to be an advertisement, it shud be treated as one of the best discussion forum and a strong organization of exteremly professional and highly qualified linux users where newbies and members fathom the usage of various things in linux...

What say ?

I agree with those who want to preserve the "purity" of wikipedia articles in the academic sense.

But sites like Fark.com and SomethingAwful.com get long entries due to massive popularity and their cultural impact.

Perhaps since LQ has a huge membership base, and is the official forum for Slackware it deserves inclusion.

Also I don't know if LQ policy of only having seperate forum for those distros that are able/willing to provide a representative is unique, but if it is unique to Linux forums I think that would warrant inclusion by itself.

If LQ is the only forum to have this policy then anybody could browse Wikipedia and safely forward to LQ knowing that there are some authoratative figures reading and monitoring the content for each distro.

Just my humble opinion

chefmark, to my knowledge we are the only Linux forum that requires vendor participation for its distro specific forums.

--jeremy