User talk:InternetFoundation
Message R to DGG April 25 2009
write new material at the top
DGG: Your contributions to Library of Congress Digital Library project seem to be written in a style that indicated public relations, not encyclopedic writing
R: I was simply trying to improve the "Vision" for a digital library project. I introduced the term Internet Library to name the goal in a unique way. The Library of Congress is not an Internet Library - because it does not meet certain criteria. It is not global in its thinking. It does not consider all users in all countries. It serves a very limited "eclectic" mix of materials which is a femtoscopic portion of the material it has available.
I am also introducing a style for organizational analysis - that can be applied to the analysis of any web-visible entity. What materials does it provide? What topics does it claim to be expert at? What groups does it serve? That sort of thing.
DGG: You must use a name that does not imply that you represent an organization. You can see from my user page that I myself have long been involved in related topics, which is why I watch to see that they are covered properly and according to the expectations of an encyclopedia.
R: I picked a unique name I can remember. InternetFoundation is my name. If you want me to change my name I will simply go elsewhere. People choose names according to their interests and hobbies. My focus is the foundation and purpose of the Internet.
As a matter of policy for Wikipedia, I strongly recommend letting corporate authors become involved. I have asked any number of organizations (nonprofit organizations, national labs, university departments, private research groups, think tanks etc) to become involved in Wikipedia --- because the material on many topics is distorted, incomplete, or totally out of date. Wikipedia will become enriched
The safety valve for groups carving out little fiefdoms in Wikipedia to promote their own agendas, is the ability of anyone to edit the material. As long as authorship is not limited,
DGG: The overall organization of material in Wikipedia is not consistent, and cannot be expected to be, since there is no central controlling body.
R: I disagree. Do not give up before trying. Do not focus on control - but oversight and performance goals.
DGG: My own view is to do what can be done with the structure, and perhaps eventually another project will supersede it.
R: I have been treating Wikipedia as a whole since it started. I am working to recast it in another form that meets specific performance criteria. It is very easy to go outside the box.
Speedy deletion of Wikipedia oversight
A tag has been placed on Wikipedia oversight requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 22:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
|
MuffledThud (talk) 23:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.