Talk:Blog: Difference between revisions
Reverted to revision 499544371 by Qwyrxian: rv spam. (TW) |
→No Mention of Static Blogging: new section |
||
Line 350: | Line 350: | ||
Has anyone got a more solid recent supportable figure on the number of blogs worldwide? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Nebuchadnezzar o'neill|Nebuchadnezzar o'neill]] ([[User talk:Nebuchadnezzar o'neill|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nebuchadnezzar o'neill|contribs]]) 14:01, 16 April 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Has anyone got a more solid recent supportable figure on the number of blogs worldwide? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Nebuchadnezzar o'neill|Nebuchadnezzar o'neill]] ([[User talk:Nebuchadnezzar o'neill|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nebuchadnezzar o'neill|contribs]]) 14:01, 16 April 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
== No Mention of Static Blogging == |
|||
I understand that the quick rise in popularity of static blogging has led to it not be included in this article despite its growing usage. |
|||
For example, popular blogging systems such as [http://jekyllrb.com Jekyll], the technology behind [http://pages.github.com Github Pages], and [http://octopress.org Octopress] are static blogs. |
|||
Furthermore, with the advent of static blogging, this statement: |
|||
: Although not a must, most good quality blogs are interactive, allowing visitors to leave comments and even message each other via GUI widgets on the blogs, and it is this interactivity that distinguishes them from other static websites.[2] |
|||
seems incorrect. Nearly all static blogging technologies include the use of dynamic GUI widgets. In fact, from the user's perspective, static blogs look very much like dynamic blogs. |
|||
My blog, http://www.neilsmithline.com, is an example of a static blog with many dynamic features. |
|||
I would be willing to help with the work of adding static blogging but I don't want to undertake it without some discussion. This article seems to be carefully monitored and I'm not looking to mess it up. |
|||
[[User:Neil Smithline|Neil Smithline]] ([[User talk:Neil Smithline|talk]]) 18:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:36, 4 July 2012
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Blog article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
This page has been cited as a source by a notable professional or academic publication: Harvard Journal of Law & Technology |
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Vandalism of this discussion
Much of the recent discussion appears to be vandalism, which has continued over the last few weeks. Does anyone object to the most obvious sections being removed via edit? I plan to just remove the last sections from "hello" (this section reappears regularly) on down. I think that some legitimate discussion has already been removed by the vandal(s) in historic edits, but it might be too complicated to recover them all. I'm no Wikipedia expert though, so does anyone have any better ideas of how to handle this? Thoughts?Treagle (talk) 18:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, your proposed edit is fine - deleting talk page comments that aren't relevant to improving the article is standard practice per WP:TPO. --Muchness (talk) 18:38, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Blog Demographics
This article should include the general demographics of the blogging population - 30% USA, 6.7% UK, 53% aged 21-35, and balanced between male/female. This is based on a study by Sysomos based on analysis of 100 million blog posts. Further coverage at ReadWriteWeb and CBS News.
Blog popularity diminishing
I think there should be a separate section about many blogs being abandoned after I read a particular article [1] (by DOUGLAS QUENQUA; June 5, 2009). Komitsuki (talk) 03:43, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Variations of Blogs Plural
The subject should discuss the variations in spelling of the plural for blog, i.e., blogs -vs- blogz. Examples of "blogz" are utilized on websites such as http://Bizzyblogz.com, http://HipHopblogz.com and http://Blogz.org Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). January 16, 2010, http://www.alexa.com/search?q=blogz&p=rkey&r=site_site.
Mark Parsec (talk) 20:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Mark Parsec
Is "instantaneously" really a word?
Under Personal Blogs it says "Some sites, such as Twitter, allow bloggers to share thoughts and feelings instantaneously with friends and family"
How about using "instantly" instead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.187.128.129 (talk) 23:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Merriam-Webster seems to think it's a word. John M Baker (talk) 00:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Definition of Blog by Researchers
Researchers in social silences, particularly within the field of communication have defined blogs as interactive, non-synchronous webpages whose host uploads postings that center around a topic. The topic need not be news, or written following the standards and practices of traditional media (balance in viewpoints, fact-based reporting, etc.). Although not all blogs allow for comments on the postings, blog readers typically are assumed to be able to respond by writing comments to bloggers’ postings as well as to other readers’ comments (although this assumption is becoming problematic, with more blogs requiring registration to post comments, or not allowing them at all).***
- Citation: . Gil de Zúñiga, H., Puig-i-Abril, E., and Rojas, H. (2009). Weblogs, traditional sources online & political participation: An assessment of how the Internet is changing the political environment. New Media & Society.11(4), 553-574. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexavila (talk • contribs) 15:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Components of a Blog
So no one's described common features of a blog? Seems like it'd be educational to list some of the features and conventions that make something recognizable as a modern blog. Here, I'll try to brainstorm a few:
- comments section: ability of readers to share feedback with the author and fellow readers
- archiving of old posts off the home page (and the ability to still navigate to them)
- "permalinks" (aka linked post titles): static links to a view of each post by itself on an unchanging webpage
- editing: ability of author(s) to edit and update posts after the initial posting
- "jumps": abridging of posts on the home page, with links to the full versions
- dated postings
- tagged posts
- bylines and capability for posts by different authors (not so sure bout this one; multi-author blogs are by no means the standard)
And I'm not saying these are all necessary to be a blog. Just listing common features. The basics that, as a whole, distinguish blogs from other almost-blog things (compare with the posts accompanying webcomic updates). --Qwerty0 (talk) 11:33, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
- Nope. That's the dreaded original research. Besides: who gets to define a modern blog" anyway? Some of us kick it old-school; that's how we roll, dawg. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:54, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
- Cool, then I'll go consult actual researchers to see if I'm right about my conjecture. If there's agreement in reputable sources that the components of a blog are important, I'll use one of their lists (if not, I won't).
- We've already decided on a list of blog "types" so I don't see how this list would be very different. I'm not intending to write in the article that these components "define" a blog; sorry, if I wasn't clear about that. I'm just interested in listing some common features. A quick anatomy lesson would be useful, I think. --Qwerty0 (talk) 01:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
editsemiprotected
This article does not recognize that the pioneer of the online blog is me, Ken Katsura. The popularity of the online blog began in 1997 on Yahoo's Message Boards (Presidential Race 2000) over the course of heated political debating. Yahoo was the "dominating presence" of the internet community relative to outreach and popular culture in 1997 when my blogging began. My "blogs" was actually "postings" which many fellow posters on the Yahoo Message Boards complained were "too long." However, I began to win consecutive "Poster of the Week" recognition at Yahoo's Message Boards, while using a unique style of "all caps" in headings which others called "shouting." (Yahoo Message Boards, "Presidential Race 2000")
I continued to win and win . . . my candidate (G.W. Bush, Jr.) won, handily. Dissatisfied with the lack of recognition that African Americans in a Leading Role (male and female) had received at the Academy Awards, over the pasa movement to place Barack Obama into the Office the President of the United States. I have never lost a single political campaign movement that I have initiated. (Yahoo Message Boards "Presidential Race 2000").
Having an upbringing in Southern California, the epicenter of popular culture in entertainment and motion pictures, a double major degree in Sociology and Political Science from the ever popular cultural University of California at Santa Barbara, leadership proven with two political science presidencies at two different higher educational institutions, outstanding writing skills, a member of the directory of Outstanding College Students of America (1988-89), graduate level higher education (Master's level core courses in Sociology - straight 'A'), a multi-sport high school athlete and college tennis player with "records and firsts" for his high school in football and tennis, and also a "black diamond" alpine skier, as well. (The Directory of Outstanding College Students of America, 1988-89, "Government" section.)
Let me state that as a professional of Sociology, that what appears to be a well intended effort to determine the origin of the blog's social popularity into the mainstream, via relying exclusively upon computer tracking data, the methodology appears to be "invalid." Tracking the "hits" or responses to blog sites alone can be a poor indicator of "social popularity," although the measurement is direct. While one is able to measure "reliable" data, the data, in this particular instance, is measuring the wrong "social phenomenon." The data merely measures directly the number of hits or responses to a given blogsite, and does not measure the blogsite's "actual social impact" upon the community of the world wide web, nor does it measure the degree to which the blogsite(s) created the "social momentum" or "social popularity," in the form of a "social movement" such that a national and global "social phenomenon" ensued as a result of the blogsite's activity.
Subsequently, we often resort to measures of social phenomenon by means of including "probabilities" and "qualitative forms of measure," which includes but is not limited to the employment of "common sense judgement and clear and logical reasoning." Be advised, when limiting our measurement of social phenomenon to the strict use of numbers, even then, we must "interpret the numbers" once we have "crunched" them. Either way, when employing "quantitative" or "qualitative" methodology in the social sciences, we will ultimately assign a "qualitative value" to our final data.
Relative to who pioneered the Internet blog, I believe that we must comparatively evaluate the origin of what would be an ongoing "social popular culture movement" leading to the blog as a national and global social movement of development and change.
The fact that Yahoo was, at the time when others have received note of being the "pioneers" of the "blog," in 1997, the proverbial "epicenter" for popular online culture and popular news and political debate, and that I was extremely successful in pioneering a winning writing design, makes my claim to being the "pioneer of the online/internet blog" a realistic and verifiable one.
Here is a comparison chart to help determine "common sense probability" of who is likely to have "pioneered a national and global Popular Cultural social movement" ultimately referred to a "blogging."
Ken Katsura Others
Source - Yahoo's Message Boards Source - Personal blogsites Exposure - Regional/Nat/Global Exposure - Exclusive, Limited Topics - Presidential Campaigns, Topics - Personal Interests California Gubernatorial Campaigns, Popular Culture, News & Media, Sports, Social Movements, Technological R & D, Socioeconomics, Science Fiction & Sociology, Civil Rights, Race, Ethnicity & Gender topics, Arts/Fashion and Entertainment, Sociopolitical Development and Change, Military campaigns for Iraqi Freedom, Sociological evaluation of WMD development in Third World Developing Nations, Environmental and Energy issues, Sociology of Human Sexuality
Internet Recognitions: Internet Recognitions: Yahoo Message Boards Editor Unknown ("Pick of the Week" multiple and ongoing since 1997) Literary recognition is specific to micro-blogging and blogging
Background: Background: Social Revolutionary Movements Uknown in Third World Developing Nations, Macro Socioeconomics & "World Systems" analysis, Science Fiction & Sociology, Constitutional Law, Economics (Macro/Micro), Marxian Economics, International Law, Criminal Justice, Marine Policy, Popular Culture and Media, Collective Behavior, Human Sexuality, Interpersonal Counseling, Advanced Research Methods (Qualitative & Quantitative), Population & Demography, Public Administration, Sociocultural Anthro, Jurisprudence, Politics and Religion in Jerusalem, The Brain & Learning, History of Women in Film, Acting, Anatomy/Physiology, Biology, Geology, Aikido
Multisport athlete:
Holds records in high school football Santa Paula H.S. (1978 - longest touchdown pass thrown at any level - 95 yards) Co-firsts in Tennis at SPUHS (1978)
- Co-first fresham to play C.I.F. singles
Co-first ethnic minority at SPUHS to be 4-year varsity letterman (1981) Black diamond level alpine skier
(This data will be continued . . .)
Who is more likely to have attracted such a wide audience, given the information above, me or someone like Justin Hall or others? Get real, people . . . You can see me at www.MySpace.com/kenkatsura and also see my ongoing "blog program" on Yahoo's "presidential race 2000" Message Board Community using the search for "Modnex" . . . as in "Modnex Intel/Skynet-Katsura Global Intel" . . . I first started out as "ModelNexus10" as a spinoff on the "replicants" from the motion picture "Blade Runner." This later evolved to "Modnex" by 1999 . . .
We seriously need to update this Wikipedia page relative to the history of the blog . . . I hope I am using this Wikipedia function correctly. This is to introduce myself and provide the consent to "formally update" the Wikipedia page, in the near future using a prepared draft on the History and Popular Development of the blog! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Katsuraforpresident (talk • contribs) 23:40, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
- Unless you have multiple reliable sources which can back up your claims, any such information you wish to add will either be removed or will not be added in the first place. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
As someone who was a fellow user of the Yahoo Message Board that this guy claims was his personal blog, I can attest he posted ad nauseum on threads that became unusable due to their size of his 4-5 posts a day for yrs. The "blog" he says he created is a Message Board, the self-publishing aspect that is the minimal-required act of blogging was nothing more than a post, not seminal in the creation of blogging than any other alt.net board that preceded the goofy self-aggrandizing rants this guy claims were unique. He wasn't even near the first users on that board and that board wasn't the first of Yahoo's boards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.243.134.17 (talk) 19:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Blogs in Education
A few collaboarators and I have observed that there is no information on the rising trend of using blogs in educational institutions recently. Would anyone object to adding information on this subject to this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by JKlimek782 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 18 April 2010 (UTC) Please review The First Self-Publishing Tool in this section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Annette Abbott (talk • contribs) 22:08, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Economics
I'm a little surprised to find nothing here about the economic aspects of blogging, other than a tiny section about advertising. I don't have the knowledge to write it myself, but most blogs I've seen carry some advertising. If I follow correctly, there seem to be two economic models. In one a blogging service hosts a "free" blog, the blogger provides content, but the service gets the ad revenue. In the other, the blogger is their own host (or pays a host) and keeps the ad revenue (or chooses not to have ads). I came here wondering if there were other models besides these, or what proportion of blog traffic is under which model, etc. If someone with solid knowledge (and preferably good sources) could expand on this aspect, I believe it would be a good addition to the article. In these times when the economic models of the media are in such turmoil, it seems to me that any article on a medium should look at the revenue model as part of the article. - Jmabel | Talk 05:46, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
WikiBlog
Some system like wikiblog maybe introduced. This might be good for those who want to write a lot, but do not know where and how. So here, in wikipedia, sorry, in wikiblog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.133.108.86 (talk) 20:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
{{editrequest}}
Can we have a list of the most popular blog sites out there? cheers.
- We have list of blogs, which is linked from this article. Algebraist 16:47, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
"blog" is NOT a portmanteau
Please note that the term portmanteau is used in general etymological discussions (outside of its narrower linguistic definition) to describe blended words, such as "spork" (spoon + fork). "Blog" is derived in a very different manner -- it is not a blended combination of "web" and "log" but rather a clipped word formed from the compound word "weblog."
It would be excellent of someone to edit the article's word origin in the first paragraph to reflect this more accurate derivation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.67.200 (talk) 17:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
"Web Log" ??
I had heard that "blog" derived from the term "binary log"; e.g., a log kept in computer format instead of on paper. Seems at least as plausible as "web log" unless someone can pinpoint the first usage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.92.174.105 (talk) 23:42, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Philly
could someone add this link and info http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/philly-requiring-bloggers-to-pay-300-for-a-business-license-101264664.html Cartersfriendly (talk) 14:54, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- The original of that appeared in the Philadelphia CityPaper not the Examiner. More to the point: is this really encyclopedic content? The city is only taxing blogs that are operating as businesses. "Government taxes business" is not exactly headline news. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:08, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- then maybe that is the story-that it took that long for government to take notice of blogs and collect taxes.Cartersfriendly (talk) 08:05, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
U.S.-Israeli relations first analyzed?
"For the first time in the history of modern journalism, the financial and political goals of U.S.-Israeli relations are being analyzed in depth."
Yeah? Blogs made that possible? And what made that impossible before blogs? The all-powerful Zionist Lobby blocking free speech? Is this Wikipedia or DailyKKKosStormFront? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.179.194.188 (talk) 15:22, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
What is Blog
A blog (a blend of the term web log, actually as I can remember the days when it all started the word Blog arrived from Brain LOG, and it is a log of your thoughts and so the log of your Brain activity. I am very surprised after so many years of the existence of the Blog nobody corrected the meaning of at here at Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.126.167.231 (talk) 18:54, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Nobody has "corrected" it because you are wrong. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:10, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- Specifically, the derivation of "blog" from "weblog" is well-attested in contemporary sources. Can you cite any support for your theory that it instead is a contraction of "brain log"? John M Baker (talk) 01:18, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
External links
Should we have some sort of link to a regular, ordinary, "person" blog? I.E. not something profit orientated or anything. It is probably the most common form, even if it is the hardest to define an example of. I was about to just post mine up ([2]) but realised it just comes off as a shoddy attempt to advertise myself. So thought I'd enquire here first :P. Or somone might have a better example all round. (Chill (talk) 12:38, 8 January 2011 (UTC))
- Nope. We don't do "random" samples, because inevitably it becomes a license for shoddy attempts to advertise oneself. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:24, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
"Logbook"
Hi all! Finally I found an opportunity to contribute to the Wikipedia! I found that the term "Logbook" was used in an early european blog following the metaphore of the Star Trek Captain's diary. I will request to add this at the end of the Origins section, just after the mention to the usage of the term zine. Please, more experienced people review my addition, since this will be my first contribution to the Wikipedia. I'm so happy! :) Findernet (talk) 15:21, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Edit request from Findernet, 9 January 2011
{{edit semi-protected}}
Hi! This is my first contribution to Wikipedia, I'm so happy to do that! :) I found a new term used in an early european blog which is "Logbook", as I commented in the Talk Page. I also found mentions for this blog to be the first european one since it was started at 1998. Because I'm new here I need to send the request instead of editing so here it is: I'm requesting to add this snippet at the end of the Origins section, just after the mention to the term "zine":
"Another early term was Logbook, which was used since 1998 in the first european blog following the metaphore of the Star Trek Captain's diary. This usage is still very popular in latin languages for referring to blogs."
This are the references I found:
- Unrelated to the author mentions, both to the early date (1998) and to the usage of the logbook metaphor:
- An older one: (2006-04-01) http://ainhoamarco.blogspot.com/2006_04_01_archive.html
- A recent one: (2010-12-08) http://bretemas.blogaliza.org/2010/12/08/wikileaks-e-os-dereitos-dos-cibercidadans/
- A statement of the own author explaining the usage of the term: (2010-12-01) http://blog.susobaleato.eu/1997/01/contedor-1997.html
- An European Comission site where it is mentioned to be the first european blog: http://www.epractice.eu/en/people/6907
- The finding of a social researcher adding that blog as the pioneers: (2007-01-15) http://calidonia.eu/2007/01/15/pioneiros/
- About the usage of the latin-language versions of the term, I found it interesting to be mentioned. That could be easily verified searching for translations like "bitácora" (Spanish) or "bitácula" (Portuguese) with thousands of findings in Google. A good example of this usage is http://bitacoras.com/
There are more references, but I think those might be enough. And, by the way: I wish you a happy new year! :D
Findernet (talk) 17:28, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
- I've left this up for a while, hoping someone else would respond....My concern with your suggested addition is probably going to sound very strange, but I'll give it a go anyway. The problem is that all of the sources you've given are, well, blogs. I know, it seems like for the topic of blogs, that a blog should be an acceptable source, but for the point you want to support, I don't think they are. Usually, blogs are not considered to be reliable sources, per our reliable sources guidelines. What we need are some regular magazine articles (they can be online magazines, like Wired, so long as they are reliable in that they have editorial staff and standards) that verify this early term, and that this term was used for something that resembles or is what we currently call a blog. Do you have or know of whether such info can be garnered? Qwyrxian (talk) 05:38, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
- Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Logan Talk Contributions 16:03, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks Qwyrxian for your answer! I just wanted to improve Wikipedia with that piece of knowledge, just feel free to use or modify it under your own needs! Findernet (talk) 05:28, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Liveblogs
Perhaps the article should discuss the concept of the "liveblog", as used in prominent websites such as the Guardian[3], Engadget[4] and Al Jazeera[5] -137.222.91.161 (talk) 13:25, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Alcohol?
In what "science-fiction-fandom slang" does "blog" mean "alcohol"? I've never heard it personally. B7T (talk) 18:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
- The comment have more than 2 years. In the article Alcohol the word "blog" is not mentioned. I'll remove it.Caiaffa (talk) 03:41, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Defamation or liability
Continue to add new developments to this section.
Judge Rules Reposting Entire Article Is Fair Use http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/06/fair-use-defense/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boxbanger 821 (talk • contribs) 06:11, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Fake or Fictional Blogs
It looks like a section on fake or fictional blogs might be informative. There is no fundamental reason a blog can't be purely fictional although the blog/internet code of conduct, The Golden Rule should appy. Codwiki (talk) 15:23, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Only if they are themselves notable. And do you mean blogs which are themselves fictitious, like the Gay Girl in Damascus turned out to be; or blogs which do not actually exist, but are described in fiction? --Orange Mike | Talk 17:26, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
What is a Web Journal?
The term "Web Journal" redirects here, but there is no mention of that term in the article. How does it relate to "blog", both technically and from a historical standpoint? In other words, why does it redirect here? 209.183.253.98 (talk) 16:18, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- Because "web journal" is apparently an obscure term used by people who find the term "blog" too vulgar or informal in tone, and want a more genteel-sounding euphemism. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Diversity of Blogs
With such diversity of blogs available, it is important to create this new section in the "Blog" wikipedia page. Blogs are devoted to sets of diverse special interests, such as blogs specializing in planning a wedding. With weddings becoming more personalized, a new level of expectations have evolved, demanding more from than bride than ever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.92.123.54 (talk) 05:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
- We'll need a reliable source that discusses about blog diversity. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:51, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Citation problem
There is a widespread and bizarre deficiency among wikipedia editors, which makes them put citations in ridiculous places. To the uninfected, it seems completely obvious that you put a citation after the fact that it is sourcing, and not before or in the middle. But once infect you think they can go anywhere. Here in this article I've found the most preposterous example I've ever seen:
- The Iraq war saw bloggers taking measured and passionate points[1] of view that go beyond the traditional left-right divide of the political spectrum.
But the article is protected so I can't correct it. How about someone puts the citation after the fact, instead of bizarrely in the middle not just of a sentence, not just of an idea, not just of a clause but in the middle of a three word phrase? And then how about you find out which poor soul decided that was a sensible place to put it, track them down, take them to one side and tell them to get help?
And then how about unprotecting the article? There can be no serious justification for it being protected for three and a half years. 200.120.206.115 (talk) 23:53, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- If we don't put citations where they are, we wouldn't know about which facts they are supporting. As for page protection, this page has been a very frequent spam and vandal target, given the high visibility of this topic.Jasper Deng (talk) 23:56, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- First, note that I've changed your section title on this talk page, as there is no reason for the vulgarity. That being said, your concerns directed my attention to that sentence. At first, I was just going to move the citation, because you are correct that it would need to be moved at least to the end of the clause, and more likely to the end of the sentence. But then I actually read it, and the associated reference, and realized that the whole thing needed to be removed. While this is an article about blogs, that does not mean the sources can actually be blogs, at least when talking about general trends. That blog post didn't in any way support the sentence it was attached to--rather, it was an alleged example of a "measured and passionate point"...which, of course, is pure original research. If someone can find a reliable source that verifies the statement in question, it can be re-added, but it can't be there as it was.
- However, I will say that your overall tone is unhelpful...please try to be a little more respectful of other editors, per WP:CIVIL. I do have to agree with Jasper Deng that unprotecting this article is simply not an option--that will just result in us making a dozen reverts a day of people adding in links to their own blogs. If you spot other problems in the article, just open a new thread here, use the template {{edit semiprotected}}, and politely explain what should be changed and why. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:18, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
- Of course, just before I wrote this, it turns out that another admin did unprotect the page. Well, if it gets bad, I suppose we can just re-protect it. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:46, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
- I like being vulgar. I'm a very vulgar person. Also I think that being "nice" and being "civil" has been extremely ineffective in encouraging proper adherence to standards of quality. Wikipedia is getting more amateurish by the day and it's at least partly because this business of "civility" is in practice used to discourage any criticism at all. But you already know me and my views in that respect.
- Anyway, fair enough about the reasons for protection but surely it should almost always be a temporary measure. It would surprise me very much if this was so relentlessly targeted as to need permanent protection. But I am quite prepared to be surprised.
- Jasper Deng, you appear to be claiming that all references are perfectly well placed just as they are. I don't think you actually can have read the example I posted. You use a very patronising "we" to attempt to justify the placement of a citation within a phrase. And then it turns out on closer inspection that it doesn't even support the fact that it is within. I'm glad that Qwyrxian took the time to examine the matter. 200.120.206.115 (talk) 01:28, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
- Guess what: If you can't be civil, you don't belong here. That's one thing about Wikipedia that isn't like other sites.
- Now I see it more closely I think the citation could be moved, but not to the very end of it.Jasper Deng (talk) 20:43, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
- Civility also includes reading an example before posting a patronising response to it. 200.120.206.115 (talk) 01:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
- No it doesn't, and I'm not gonna discuss this further (WP:STICK).Jasper Deng (talk) 02:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
- It absolutely does. If you can't see the incivility in passing patronising comments when you haven't even bothered to read the example, you're got problems. 200.120.204.192 (talk) 11:42, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
- No it doesn't, and I'm not gonna discuss this further (WP:STICK).Jasper Deng (talk) 02:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
- Civility also includes reading an example before posting a patronising response to it. 200.120.206.115 (talk) 01:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
- Of course, just before I wrote this, it turns out that another admin did unprotect the page. Well, if it gets bad, I suppose we can just re-protect it. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:46, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Blurring the distinction?
I don't really think interactive blogging websites like Blogger have done anything to make the distinction less apparent. This is the edit I'm talking about.Jasper Deng (talk) 05:12, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. I didn't cite Blogger. I merely was trying to make explicit what is already implicit in the balance of the introduction. (See the following paragraph regarding social networking.) Still, the "blurring" characterization is my own assertion without a source, so I'll repost without that sentence. Thanks again for the feedback. Frappyjohn (talk) 06:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Book log/Web log
This is a really small thing, but isn't blog conceived from the two words book and log? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.146.82.197 (talk) 15:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- No. As the article says it is "Web"+"log". -- Alexf(talk) 11:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
?
[File:Nuvola apps edu languages.svg ] about this file are you kind to void "languages" in the title ?-thank you!188.25.52.31 (talk) 05:56, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
- Huh? Your meaning is not clear. -- Alexf(talk) 11:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
query re number of blogs in existence
The article claims as of 16 February 2011, there were over 156 million public blogs but the reference supporting this is a dud.
Has anyone got a more solid recent supportable figure on the number of blogs worldwide? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nebuchadnezzar o'neill (talk • contribs) 14:01, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
No Mention of Static Blogging
I understand that the quick rise in popularity of static blogging has led to it not be included in this article despite its growing usage.
For example, popular blogging systems such as Jekyll, the technology behind Github Pages, and Octopress are static blogs.
Furthermore, with the advent of static blogging, this statement:
- Although not a must, most good quality blogs are interactive, allowing visitors to leave comments and even message each other via GUI widgets on the blogs, and it is this interactivity that distinguishes them from other static websites.[2]
seems incorrect. Nearly all static blogging technologies include the use of dynamic GUI widgets. In fact, from the user's perspective, static blogs look very much like dynamic blogs.
My blog, http://www.neilsmithline.com, is an example of a static blog with many dynamic features.
I would be willing to help with the work of adding static blogging but I don't want to undertake it without some discussion. This article seems to be carefully monitored and I'm not looking to mess it up. Neil Smithline (talk) 18:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
- ^ Mervin Dean. November 7, 2009 (2009-11-07). "'The Charge of the NATO Crusade' « Mervin Dean's Blog". mervindean.wordpress.com. Retrieved 2011-01-28.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
- B-Class Journalism articles
- Top-importance Journalism articles
- WikiProject Journalism articles
- B-Class Media articles
- Top-importance Media articles
- WikiProject Media articles
- B-Class Internet culture articles
- Top-importance Internet culture articles
- WikiProject Internet culture articles
- Wikipedia pages referenced by the press