| Revision as of 05:09, 15 January 2007 editLcament (talk | contribs)16 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:28, 15 January 2007 edit undoIndianGeneralist (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers16,844 edits →Wikileaks should integrate with Misplaced PagesNext edit → | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| == Criticism == | == Criticism == | ||
| Is it me, or do the statements in the criticism section not make sense? ] 05:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC) | Is it me, or do the statements in the criticism section not make sense? ] 05:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ==Wikileaks should integrate with Misplaced Pages== | |||
| One of main my Misplaced Pages wishlist : | |||
| {{cquote|'discussion' page on Misplaced Pages should have a section for debating where a NPOV/neutral admin moderator can summarize all the distinct points (typically there are very few even for hotly debated/controversial topics) and these distinct points should have voting buttons as well.}} | |||
| That wish list seems to be fulfilled by Wikileaks but I think Misplaced Pages will always have more visibility as compared to Wikileaks and hence Wikileaks should find ways to integrate with it e.g. the main page of a topic should always be the Misplaced Pages page and there should be a link to Wikileaks page (if it exists) having leaked data as well as it should support blogging/debating and should have buttons as well. <br> | |||
| ''Vjdchauhan 07:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC).'' (''Information should be centralized and rest all should be de-centralized'') | |||
Revision as of 07:28, 15 January 2007
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 12 January 2007 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
I speedily-kept the debate. If you disagree and your a regular wikipedia editor contact me on my talk page and I'll un-close it. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 05:44, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
New article
- Added a ton of resources/RS sources. Needs cleanup, working on it. Please help! F.F.McGurk 22:23, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Is Wikilinks a typo for Wikileaks or something different? Peter Grey 00:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- They're different. Wikilinks are where you type a page name in double square brackets. In the context of Misplaced Pages, they're usually just called links. Picaroon 01:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- For the edit I just made it was a typo. Mackenson got most of them before, we both missed that last one... F.F.McGurk 01:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Criticism
Is it me, or do the statements in the criticism section not make sense? Lcament 05:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Wikileaks should integrate with Misplaced Pages
One of main my Misplaced Pages wishlist :
| “ | 'discussion' page on Misplaced Pages should have a section for debating where a NPOV/neutral admin moderator can summarize all the distinct points (typically there are very few even for hotly debated/controversial topics) and these distinct points should have voting buttons as well. | ” |
That wish list seems to be fulfilled by Wikileaks but I think Misplaced Pages will always have more visibility as compared to Wikileaks and hence Wikileaks should find ways to integrate with it e.g. the main page of a topic should always be the Misplaced Pages page and there should be a link to Wikileaks page (if it exists) having leaked data as well as it should support blogging/debating and should have buttons as well.
Vjdchauhan 07:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC). (Information should be centralized and rest all should be de-centralized)