Talk:Wikipedia

“Copycat” section of article, copywriting, and objectivity.

At the end of the “access to content” tab of the article this section is listed:“Copycats Russians have developed Ruwiki clone. Iranians have created a new website called wikisa.org.” I don’t believe it to be objective to unilaterally declare these websites “copycats” of Wikipedia, regardless of if they are or are not. I also wonder about the inconsistency of how Russians “developed” Ruwiki, but Iranians “create a new website” called Wikisia.org. Lastly, I find it odd how the section refers to “Russians” and “Iranians” instead of the organizations and people responsible for creating the websites. All of these elements make for a confusing paragraph and I would appreciate any input on how to reformat it, if it needs to be deleted altogether, or I am somehow mistaken. Thank you. Slamforeman (talk) 18:10, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Extreme bias

https://thefederalist.com/2023/08/17/extensive-edits-to-hunter-bidens-wikipedia-page-prove-sites-extreme-bias/ 24.192.227.169 (talk) 13:37, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

And that Federalist article is a textbook example of confirmation bias. Not sure what you want done here. Should we delete Wikipedia because the Federalist doesn't like it? freshacconci (✉) 13:42, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

This article is clearly more biassed than any Wikipedia articles. Paying someone to write/edit your WP article is banned. WP is not responsible for those who break the rules doing so. Also, the Hunter Biden page is controversial (because he is) and thus is often reviewed and checked by administrators and other high-ups to ensure neutrality. What do you want us to do about this: include in the article that WP is full of propaganda when it clearly isn't? JacobTheRox (talk) 10:47, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Biased against what ? Anonymous8206 (talk) 21:27, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Pronounciation

[note 4] says: "Pronounced /ˌwɪkɪˈpiːdiə/ (listen) wik-ih-PEE-dee-ə or /ˌwɪki-/ (listen) wik-ee-". I don't say Wikipedia. Me and my British friends say /ˌwɪkəˈpiːdiə/ and also sometimes end it /-dʲə/ (palatized). I'd like to hear if enough people say it this way to include it as a valid pronounciation. To be fair, at this rate we will need a "Pronounciation of Wikipedia" article sometime soon! JacobTheRox (talk) 10:44, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

"...palatization is a way of pronouncing a consonant in which part of the tongue is moved close to the hard palate. Consonants pronounced this way are said to be palatalized and are transcribed in the International Phonetic Alphabet by affixing the letter ⟨ʲ⟩ to the base consonant. Palatalization cannot minimally distinguish words in most dialects of English, but it may do so in languages such as Russian, Japanese, Norwegian (dialects), Võro, and Irish." John Mark Wagnon (talk) 22:40, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 August 2023

Could you change from "the article start it had been..." to "the website was approved by" in access to content? 113.162.142.12 (talk) 11:50, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: I deleted the whole paragraph as the project is really the free online version of Encyclopedia of China, not in any way related to Wikipedia, and does not belong in a section about access to the real Wikipedia from China. Xan747 ✈️ 🧑‍✈️ 22:16, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2023

Change from:

"Unlike traditional encyclopedias, Wikipedia follows the procrastination principle regarding the security of its content, meaning that it waits until a problem arises to fix it.

To this:

"Unlike traditional encyclopedias that are offline, Wikipedia follows the procrastination principle', which is the act of unnecessarily and voluntarily delaying or postponing something despite knowing that there will be negative consequences for doing so, regarding the security of its content. This means that it waits until a problem arises to fix it."

That looks like an improvement to me of course. 205.155.225.253 (talk) 16:15, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done. I have looked at the source for the passage in question, and I don't think it says what this change is proposing. In particular, where do you get the notion that waiting for problems to arise is "unnecessary" and "voluntary"? I'm not sure that it's possible for Wikipedia to predict and fix in advance all problems that might arise...  — Amakuru (talk) 16:24, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

I got it in a another article. 205.155.225.253 (talk) 16:26, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2023

Wikipedia is an online forum that shows different articles of work Benherewhile (talk) 07:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Meters (talk) 07:40, 22 September 2023 (UTC)