| Revision as of 13:18, 16 August 2001 editWojPob (talk | contribs)2,524 edits moved july annoucements to /july← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:07, 20 November 2001 edit undoLarry Sanger (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,066 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Got an announcement? Make it! | Got an announcement? Make it! | ||
| '''November 20, 2001''' | |||
| We are looking for a new logo. See . | |||
| You can now get the code and data for the ] wikis (in giant tarballs for each site). This means that programmers can now (if they can figure out how :-) ) use Misplaced Pages articles on their own websites and work on Misplaced Pages code. | |||
| If you're looking for starry-eyed idealism and general inspiration, you could do far worse than Larry Sanger's "" recently posted on . | |||
| In other news, recent discussions on ] as well as on ] have raised some interesting questions about the future of Misplaced Pages. It seems that many are now desiring some way to sort through the RecentChanges page more easily, because (not that we're complaining or anything) there are so many of us at work now that there are hundreds of edits per day--making it difficult to identify edits in which we're interested and distinguish them from other edits. Various solutions are being considered. | |||
| '''November 9, 2001''' | |||
| After some deliberation on ] and , we have installed a new wiki, http://meta.wikipedia.com/, separate from the main Misplaced Pages wiki, for purposes of Misplaced Pages discussion and essay-writing and such. The purpose of our doing this is twofold: to keep meta-discussion separate from article writing (and thus to emphasize the importance of article writing) and to test out (and get used to) the ]. So please do visit http://meta.wikipedia.com/ both to get an idea of how the new software might work and, if you wish, to engage in meta-discussion. | |||
| Misplaced Pages passes <b>8,000</b> articles. See ] for examples. | |||
| Also, if you have essays linked from your personal pages (e.g., ]) or from ], could you please move that content to http://meta.wikipedia.com/ ? | |||
| '''November 6, 2001''' | |||
| Misplaced Pages can now include TeX or LaTeX formulas (as PNGs) in articles. If you would like to have a formula turned into a PNG, go to http://www.wikipedia.com/Edward_O'Connor/TeXinbox and add it to the list! | |||
| ]: 16,000 articles announced. Although we have grown faster in the weeks following September 11, press coverage and Slashdotting, we now--without help from significant press coverage--seem to be growing at a steady rate of somewhat better than 2,000 articles per month. At this rate, we will have 25,000 articles by next April and 40,000 articles by next November. (Of course, no one ''really'' knows if this rate is sustainable, but it could be--for all we know, it will increase!) | |||
| Announcement from ]: | |||
| I think we've discussed subpages quite a bit--certainly enough to air the | |||
| issues and give people a chance to state their views and change their | |||
| minds--and in view of this, I've decided to get rid of them. | |||
| Let me explain this decision--I'm done arguing for it, but of course you | |||
| are owed an explanation, since the issue has been very controversial. | |||
| Examining the various pages on which people have discussed them, it seems | |||
| there is at least a majority of people in favor of getting rid of them or | |||
| who are amenable to the idea of getting rid of them. I think it's pretty | |||
| important, although perhaps not absolutely essential in every case, that | |||
| we at least not contradict majority opinion, when a consensus cannot be | |||
| arrived at. The majority includes many old hands who have had more | |||
| experience with the problems associated with subpages than some of their | |||
| newer advocates, which I also think is important. Finally, and probably | |||
| as importantly as anything else, my well considered opinion is that the | |||
| arguments in favor of getting rid of them are much, much stronger than the | |||
| arguments in favor of keeping them. I predict yer gonna thank me in a | |||
| year. (Maybe not ''all'' of you. :-) ) --] | |||
| See also ], ], ], ], ]. | |||
| '''November 5, 2001''' | |||
| Misplaced Pages front page has now a PageRank (Google Rank) of 7/10. | |||
| '''November 2, 2001''' | |||
| ]: Jimbo's been looking at various ], and one interesting statistic has surfaced: the number of people (unique IPs) that have edited Misplaced Pages on any given day of October ranged from 96 to 236, with the vast majority of days between 130 and 180. After the recently increased traffic from Google, it seems we can expect an average number of daily editors of about 170. We can expect this number to continue to climb, however, as the virtuous cycle of content-traffic-contributors-more content continues into the indefinite future. | |||
| The number of unique visitors (editors or not) ranged from 3,112 to 7,983 in October, with a pre-October 28 average of about 5,000; the post-October 28 average is shaping up to be something like 8,000. The latter is not expected to decline, because it is not due to press coverage, but instead to (we expect) stable and growing factors related to the amount of traffic Google sends us. | |||
| While we're at it, pageviews ranged from 21,491 (on a very slow weekend day) to 48,321. They are now very much on the high end of this range. | |||
| All of these statistics are, by the way, enormous increases over just, say, three months ago. | |||
| '''News Archive''' | '''News Archive''' | ||
| ]<br> | |||
| ]<br> | |||
| ]<br> | |||
| ]<br> | ]<br> | ||
| ]<br> | ]<br> | ||
| Line 21: | Line 70: | ||
| ]<br> | ]<br> | ||
| ]<br> | ]<br> | ||
| ---- | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 19:07, 20 November 2001
Got an announcement? Make it!
November 20, 2001
We are looking for a new logo. See .
If you're looking for starry-eyed idealism and general inspiration, you could do far worse than Larry Sanger's "How a Giant, 💕 Might Transform Learning" recently posted on OpenSourceSchools.org.
November 9, 2001
After some deliberation on Misplaced Pages-L and an essay, we have installed a new wiki, http://meta.wikipedia.com/, separate from the main Misplaced Pages wiki, for purposes of Misplaced Pages discussion and essay-writing and such. The purpose of our doing this is twofold: to keep meta-discussion separate from article writing (and thus to emphasize the importance of article writing) and to test out (and get used to) the Misplaced Pages PHP script. So please do visit http://meta.wikipedia.com/ both to get an idea of how the new software might work and, if you wish, to engage in meta-discussion.
Also, if you have essays linked from your personal pages (e.g., Larry Sanger/Columns) or from Misplaced Pages commentary, could you please move that content to http://meta.wikipedia.com/ ?
November 6, 2001
Misplaced Pages can now include TeX or LaTeX formulas (as PNGs) in articles. If you would like to have a formula turned into a PNG, go to http://www.wikipedia.com/Edward_O'Connor/TeXinbox and add it to the list!
Size of Misplaced Pages: 16,000 articles announced. Although we have grown faster in the weeks following September 11, press coverage and Slashdotting, we now--without help from significant press coverage--seem to be growing at a steady rate of somewhat better than 2,000 articles per month. At this rate, we will have 25,000 articles by next April and 40,000 articles by next November. (Of course, no one really knows if this rate is sustainable, but it could be--for all we know, it will increase!)
Announcement from Larry Sanger:
I think we've discussed subpages quite a bit--certainly enough to air the issues and give people a chance to state their views and change their minds--and in view of this, I've decided to get rid of them.
Let me explain this decision--I'm done arguing for it, but of course you are owed an explanation, since the issue has been very controversial.
Examining the various pages on which people have discussed them, it seems there is at least a majority of people in favor of getting rid of them or who are amenable to the idea of getting rid of them. I think it's pretty important, although perhaps not absolutely essential in every case, that we at least not contradict majority opinion, when a consensus cannot be arrived at. The majority includes many old hands who have had more experience with the problems associated with subpages than some of their newer advocates, which I also think is important. Finally, and probably as importantly as anything else, my well considered opinion is that the arguments in favor of getting rid of them are much, much stronger than the arguments in favor of keeping them. I predict yer gonna thank me in a year. (Maybe not all of you. :-) ) --Larry Sanger
See also Misplaced Pages subpages pros and cons, Larry Sanger/Why I am suspicious of subpages, Larry Sanger/Accidental linking and hard-wired category schemes, Larry Sanger/The case against subpages, Misplaced Pages commentary/Get rid of subpages entirely.
November 5, 2001
Misplaced Pages front page has now a PageRank (Google Rank) of 7/10.
November 2, 2001
Misplaced Pages statistics: Jimbo's been looking at various Misplaced Pages statistics, and one interesting statistic has surfaced: the number of people (unique IPs) that have edited Misplaced Pages on any given day of October ranged from 96 to 236, with the vast majority of days between 130 and 180. After the recently increased traffic from Google, it seems we can expect an average number of daily editors of about 170. We can expect this number to continue to climb, however, as the virtuous cycle of content-traffic-contributors-more content continues into the indefinite future.
The number of unique visitors (editors or not) ranged from 3,112 to 7,983 in October, with a pre-October 28 average of about 5,000; the post-October 28 average is shaping up to be something like 8,000. The latter is not expected to decline, because it is not due to press coverage, but instead to (we expect) stable and growing factors related to the amount of traffic Google sends us.
While we're at it, pageviews ranged from 21,491 (on a very slow weekend day) to 48,321. They are now very much on the high end of this range.
All of these statistics are, by the way, enormous increases over just, say, three months ago.
News Archive
/October 2001
/September 2001
/August 2001
/July 2001
/June 2001
/May 2001
/April 2001
/March 2001
/February 2001
/January 2001