Wikipedia on mefi November 22, 2004 3:53 PM   Subscribe

Metafilter article at the Wikipedia. I've just updated that membership is back up, but is anything else missing?
posted by feelinglistless to MetaFilter-Related at 3:53 PM (22 comments total)

I've been meaning to help rewrite this entry there (and the one for me). The focus on politics has be overblown since someone alerted me to the very first version. I'll add to it soon.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 3:59 PM on November 22, 2004

It's actually quite amusing on the revision page how much the politics angle has gone back and forth.
posted by feelinglistless at 4:07 PM on November 22, 2004

A bit about the posting policy - re: what constitutes an appropriate post - would be helpful.
posted by troutfishing at 4:21 PM on November 22, 2004

Yeah trout, because I haven't been completely clear with you. Sure. It's still a mystery is it?
posted by mathowie (staff) at 4:25 PM on November 22, 2004

seriously, trout, take a couple days off..
posted by cell divide at 4:30 PM on November 22, 2004

I link to the MeFi wiki?
Because I'm too lazy to add it myself?
posted by rhapsodie at 4:59 PM on November 22, 2004

'A' link, rather.
posted by rhapsodie at 5:00 PM on November 22, 2004

It says on the wiki that there are currently 17,000 members, while MeFi home says there are now over 18,000. Perhaps a page can be made that simply outputs the number of current members, and then in place of the extimate you can simply put an include like <?php include ''; ?> er somethin.
Or you can just go in and change the thing manually every time the odometer rolls another g of users.
posted by ChasFile at 5:22 PM on November 22, 2004

Fixed between the time I noticed it this morning and the time I posted this evening. How embarassing!
posted by ChasFile at 5:26 PM on November 22, 2004


That may not be the most helpful Wikipedia entry, but it's definitely...colorful.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 6:07 PM on November 22, 2004

Matt - well no, I actually was confused and still am. But, I guess this :

1) I shouldn't do political posts.

2) I shouldn't do political posts, even those loosely construed as such.

3) I should only do political posts which amount to earthshaking "breaking news" : news as novelty and disaster, as opposed to matteo's recent excellent religion post which I'd characterize as "news as constructed meaning".

I'm assuming either #1 or #2.

Odd though - a Metafilter first perhaps ? - a de-facto banning due to being "problematic" or "inappropriate" ( rather than for improper language or any obvious reason ).

Good luck with your cold : Hot peppers can help with respiratory ailments, and garlic is a good as ten mothers ( according to Les Blanc, anyway )
posted by troutfishing at 8:30 PM on November 22, 2004

"is anything else missing?"

Yes -- an indication of what makes MetaFilter what it is. I don't think the entry is any good at all.
posted by nthdegx at 8:45 PM on November 22, 2004

From the history:

Nov 23, 2004 Céçaquiéça (The Site - better explanation of the membership situation)

Well yes. But frankly, what are you trying to say?
posted by feelinglistless at 11:39 PM on November 22, 2004

Well, I took a stab at it. (I've been contributing over there the last week or so, and enjoying it a lot.) See if you think the Content section is improved at all -- I tried to put things in terms that describe MeFi well, without committing the Wikipedia sin of going POV -- i.e. taking a position incompatible with neutrality. They have their standards, too. (I just wish their version of MeTa weren't spread all over the site like so many Tehran embassy documents.) Ultimately what a MeFi insider thinks is not necessarily what the entry should say; it should simply describe.

My goal with the rewording was to de-emphasize the identity-politics angle (we're blue, and we're blue!), in hopes that it won't be an attractive nuisance that entices unsympathetic edits like the ones that place us in direct opposition to Pretty Hate Machine (you know).

I think the membership count business is a distraction (who cares, really?). It's not an accurate description of the living community in any case, which as we've previously discussed is probably not much larger than 1 or 2 thousand regular posters (and some of us are noisier than others). Frankly, the whole article could use some reorganization (and wikification), and ngthdegx is quite perceptive -- but I need to go to bed.

I hope this doesn't turn into what happened to our own little MetaFilter wiki the night that #mefi got a hold of it!
posted by dhartung at 1:23 AM on November 23, 2004

Changed Whenever possible, this is limited to as few threads a day as possible
to This is typically limited to as few threads a day as possible
to eliminate the redundancy.
posted by me3dia at 9:46 AM on November 23, 2004

See, me3dia, I didn't even know that the Talk page for the MetaFilter entry was over here. That's the kind of disorganization I'm going on about.

Anyway, Steve and a couple others have made some good improvements, and Matt is looking better already.
posted by dhartung at 12:34 AM on November 24, 2004

dhartung, you mean Matthew. Definitely looking sharp there.
posted by brownpau at 6:34 AM on November 24, 2004

I didn't even know that the Talk page for the MetaFilter entry was over here.
I'm not quite sure what you mean.

The page is looking a lot better. I've done a little editing as well.

I'm not sure how much emphasis should be placed on thread deletion. Considering this is, in theory, an encyclopedia entry, it's probably not the best place to outline policy, especially one that's so notoriously capricious.
posted by me3dia at 10:00 AM on November 24, 2004

Yeah, that is better. Good work everyone.
posted by feelinglistless at 10:15 AM on November 24, 2004

Someone add in Viewropa, too.
posted by amberglow at 10:49 AM on November 24, 2004

Someone add in Viewropa, too.

posted by me3dia at 10:53 AM on November 24, 2004

Thanks to the people here for improving these articles. I was one of the people who worked on the previous not-very-good version. Anyway. I have a couple of copyright questions: firstly, I've just tagged Matthaughey.jpg as {{unknown}} (that, is copyright / licensing details are unknown). Is this or a better image of Matt available under a suitably free licence? CC licences are OK for images, though -nc would be a problem. Secondly, at Talk:MetaFilter, User:Céçaquiéça asks whether we can have permission to use "a logo (or the logo itself)". I presume he/she means the MeFi logo. It's generally considered that logos (in context) are fair use, but I thought I should bring it up here. What do you say, Matt?
posted by rbrwr at 2:20 PM on November 24, 2004

« Older Unposted Anonymous AskMes on contacts page   |   Profile URLs now going to names not numbers? Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments