Where results make sense
About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   PR   |   Contact us  

Topic: What Wikipedia is not

Related Topics

  Thoughts For Deletion: Wikipedia is not Thermopylae
There are a few dissenters though, most of whom are beating the "censorship" drum and complaining about oppression of the masses and their rights to free speech.
The latter of these is the better, in my opinion, because the point of the statement is to explain that we can neither guarantee that all content will comply with some standard of good taste, nor will we exclude content that some people find objectionable (encyclopaedic material about sex, for example).
While it's correct to say that we generally don't exclude content for reasons of taste based on social or religious norms, we undoubtedly do exclude content based on our policies and based the laws of Florida and of the United States, where the projects are based.
thoughtsfordeletion.blogspot.com /2007/05/wikipedia-is-not-thermopylae.html   (0 words)

 Wiki is not paper - Meta
It is quite possible, for example, that when you finish typing in everything you want to say about poker, there might well be over 100 pages, and enough text for a full-length book by itself.
This would certainly never be tolerated in a paper encyclopedia, which is why Encyclopedia Britannica has such limited information on the topic (and on most other topics).
It requires electrical energy, affordable computing infrastructure and world wide access to a planetary computing grid to meet its articulated goal of providing free access to human knowledge to all humans.
meta.wikimedia.org /wiki/Wiki_is_not_paper   (1442 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)

  About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   Press   |   Contact us  
Copyright © 2005-2007 www.factbites.com Usage implies agreement with terms.