Talk:Amateur: Difference between revisions
m Questions references and argument |
→Darwin: new section |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
1. AIUI Wikipedia articles are supposed to reference Internet articles. Where are those references? |
1. AIUI Wikipedia articles are supposed to reference Internet articles. Where are those references? |
||
2. This is an important article, and deserves more attention. The notion that "professional" = "superior", "amateur" = "inferior" doubtless appeals to those who are able to demonstrate that they are in the "professional" camp, including academics, but surely it is obvious that if someone makes a valuable contribution to a field of endeavour - e.g. by contributing a widely-accepted mathematical proof - it is in fact irrelevant whether that field of endeavour is their "primary" field or not (and the notion that people have a "primary" activity is in itself perhaps a bizarre notion that could usefully be knocked on the head.[[User:Sixareen|Sixareen]] ([[User talk:Sixareen|talk]]) 20:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC) |
2. This is an important article, and deserves more attention. The notion that "professional" = "superior", "amateur" = "inferior" doubtless appeals to those who are able to demonstrate that they are in the "professional" camp, including academics, but surely it is obvious that if someone makes a valuable contribution to a field of endeavour - e.g. by contributing a widely-accepted mathematical proof - it is in fact irrelevant whether that field of endeavour is their "primary" field or not (and the notion that people have a "primary" activity is in itself perhaps a bizarre notion that could usefully be knocked on the head.[[User:Sixareen|Sixareen]] ([[User talk:Sixareen|talk]]) 20:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC) |
||
== Darwin == |
|||
I am not sure if Darwin can be considered amateur since he was paid for his services on the Beagle, and profited from his work in "On the origin of Species". - --[[Special:Contributions/74.198.165.53|74.198.165.53]] ([[User talk:74.198.165.53|talk]]) 02:31, 7 April 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 02:31, 7 April 2012
An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Amateur article, and they have been placed on this page for your convenience.
Tip: Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add {{User:LinkBot/suggestions/Amateur}} to this page. — LinkBot 00:56, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC
I don't think the open source comment is accurate. Most open source programmers are actually professionals who choose not to take advantage of copyright protection. --Joflynn (talk) 22:12, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
1. AIUI Wikipedia articles are supposed to reference Internet articles. Where are those references? 2. This is an important article, and deserves more attention. The notion that "professional" = "superior", "amateur" = "inferior" doubtless appeals to those who are able to demonstrate that they are in the "professional" camp, including academics, but surely it is obvious that if someone makes a valuable contribution to a field of endeavour - e.g. by contributing a widely-accepted mathematical proof - it is in fact irrelevant whether that field of endeavour is their "primary" field or not (and the notion that people have a "primary" activity is in itself perhaps a bizarre notion that could usefully be knocked on the head.Sixareen (talk) 20:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Darwin
I am not sure if Darwin can be considered amateur since he was paid for his services on the Beagle, and profited from his work in "On the origin of Species". - --74.198.165.53 (talk) 02:31, 7 April 2012 (UTC)