Talk:Wikipedia

This is NOT the page on which to ask general questions about Wikipedia.
	This talk page is exclusively for discussion concerning Wikipedia's article on itself. To ask questions about using Wikipedia, see the Help desk. To get help with reference questions, see the Reference desk. To discuss Wikipedia policy or practices, see the Village Pump. For other useful links, see the Community portal.

Countries

Moved to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Countries

Link for "volunteers"

The first paragraph says "Wikipedia's 13 million articles (3 million in English) have been written collaboratively by volunteers," and "volunteers" links to the [[Volunteer|general volunteer page]. I think it should link to the [Virtual_volunteering|virtual volunteering] page instead, since these are specifically online volunteers, rather than traditional onsite volunteers, especially since Wikipedia is one of the largest examples of virtual volunteering. Comment by: User:Jcravens42

Beta version of Wikipedia

Wikipedia article does not contain any information about the new beta feature nor any content about wikipedia's future. Wikipedia staff should do something about this.

Servers in Korea decommissioned?

According to Wikitech [2] [3] and Ganglia, there are no longer Wikipedia servers in Korea, though even Meta-Wiki hasn't been updated and there seems to be no up-to-date server layout diagram.

Regarding web 2.0

I had a look at the definition of web 2.0, which includes ajax (javascript xml), but I don't think that wikipedia uses much of ajax at all, all of which are processed after the pages are refreshed, so you might want to think taking it off. Besides that, wikipedia uses more html codes for format instead of user friendly, eg bbcodes, or just a new line (
is required in this case) so afterall, wikipedia is not really user oriented too. Please let me know about your thoughts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ted chou12 (talk • contribs) 05:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

That's not what Web 2.0 means. 128.211.198.168 (talk) 03:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Re "user friendly" editing, have a look at http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Usability_and_Experience_Study. It's been up since May this year (2009), but has had zilch comment on content on its talk page (which really surprised me!) -- Bricaniwi (talk) 09:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikiseek

This Wikiseek seems like it could be a useful tool if it searched past histories of articles... 70.59.140.179 (talk) 06:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

http

It should say that wikipedia uses htpt to edit things. hot do you spell it, is it http or htsp or something like that. Wikigoogleplex (talk) 02:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Q program, discussion and criticism

Somebody who is active on this article may want to give a listen to the podcast of Q for Monday, 7-Dec-2009. It includes a discussion concerning criticisms of established editors who make knee-jerk reverts of contributions by newbies. Link will be at http://www.cbc.ca/podcasting/pastpodcasts.html?42#ref42 whn they put it up, or if you catch this soon enough the live feed will be available through the day as the shows moves through time zones in the morning, and it's repeat in the evening. Check http://www.cbc.ca/q/ Kid Bugs (talk) 15:32, 7 December 2009 (UTC) yes u should talk 2 us! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolphinsrok (talk • contribs) 16:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

In the UK there has been a lot of negative press around the dropping numbers of contributers (me for one) to Wikipedia. This is thought to be mainly due to the amount of red tape and "over zealous" monitoring of submissions by editors and the "Wiki Police". Perhaps this needs to be featured? (208.51.151.2 (talk) 15:26, 11 December 2009 (UTC))