345:
1033:'s revert, which didn't really make sense to me as I was just stating what seemed to be a factual statement.My concern is/was that it is so often used with new users who might not understand our sourcing guidelines or this page, that it might give a false hope of inclusion or something of the sort, so they should know that it's typically better to cite other policies and guidelines, which I don't think the current note does well. Oddly enough, my concern was that
154:
1054:
213:
185:
123:
277:
199:
313:
1245:
care about whether the status is essay or not, I care about the fact that it's unclear until you've read all the way through the page. And the most recent archive discussion on this point appears to have been over eight years ago and doesn't appear to have a consensus, so forgive me if "this has been discussed to death before," isn't a particularly compelling reasoning.
1217:
Is there any specific reason this page doesn't have the "This is an explanatory essay, not a guideline or policy" template at the top of the page like most other essay summaries of policy/guidelines; and instead has it as inline text buried at the bottom of the page? The editnotice for this talk page
949:
There is a whole essay at the bottom of the page that says this page is fine to cite at AfD. Why is your opinion enshrined on this page, yet mine is not? "Some editors" may object to this page being cited at AfD, but that doesn't mean that people should be discouraged from doing so. "Some editors"
716:
message to be visible. It is no use just telling people who are completely new to
Knowledge to use reliable sources. Their conception of what constitutes RS is likely to be radically different from what it says at WP:RS. A brief heads up on what we at Knowledge mean by it is what is needed. Same
1002:
This page is often a target for editors who aren't fond of the GNG or some aspect of
Knowledge's notability guidelines, resulting in heated-yet-tedious debates. It's currently tagged as an information page (or at least categorized that way), which seems fairly accurate (though the title of the page
972:
templates won't stop that. The whole point of this page is its simplicity with a minimum of doubt for new users who genuinely do not understand why an article on what their grandfather did in a war may not be suitable. If there is evidence of systemic abuse of this page at AfD, it may be reasonable
843:
I would be against adding any new links. This suggestion wouldn't be much more than a repeat of WP:N. We should be removing links from this page rather than adding more. The essence of this page is to present the information in the minimalist possible way. Not overwhelm the reader with policies
1007:
says, and therefore do think that it's more of an information page than an essay. Some editors disagree with this page like some editors disagree with the GNG. I don't think I've ever linked to it from anywhere, but don't think it's a problematic page to link to, either. FWIW, despite the response
1244:
Pre-emptively, before someone yells about how "this is not an essay" -- fine, whatever, the "this is a summary of policy" template, either way. There should be *something* distinctive indicating the page's policy status at the top, instead of buried at the bottom as in-line text. I don't actually
525:
Not sure, I mean the utmost brevity and simplicity are the soul of this page. I would prefer not to break the symmetry between the three highlighted items in the box, and the three sections of text below it. It there is a need to emphasize that the significant coverage has to have been, you know,
912:
There is an entire essay at the bottom about how not to use this at AfD: it's just an essay that oversimplifies our actual standards here, and I'm frankly shocked as to the aggression this has warranted: I'm fine with any tweaks, but I don't think wholesale reversion is needed here: we normally
561:
I don't really see the point. The "Reliable sources" section already mentions "publisher" and "published". So why would a reader think that unpublished sources are acceptable? It certainly doesn't warrant an additional section. I'm struggling to understand what mistake you are trying to guard
1294:
as a test: should every one of the millions of pages here follow the same format with the same boxes and same style? Or might life be sufficiently complex that some exceptions arise? If exceptions do arise, should the closest-fitting box be used any way because that would scratch an itch?
1309:
No they shouldn't. And fortunately, they don't. Now that we've satisfied that, should exceptions to a general best practice have a good reason for being exceptions? Would the universe not be a kinder and better place if it were to prefer to err on the side of being helpful over unique?
896:
about how "some editors" think this should not be used at AfD. I dislike this line, and I personally cite this page at AfD. I really don't like being told not to do so by Tony's fiat. It seems we need to discuss this, because Tony is going to edit war to keep this wording here.
917:
on all other essays which makes this point clear. My concern is that new users, for whom this essay is intended might think that simply meeting this essay guarantees a place in
Knowledge (it doesn't), and hedging our bets to let them know that it might not always work like that.
950:
don't add their own opinions to pages when others object. As far as adding the "essay" tag, this has been discussed to death already. You're barging into an old debate, telling one side that their opinion means nothing, and edit warring to keep in one side's views. The
356:
98:
734:
and this page identical is such a big issue. The fourteen words in that message are a true reflection of policy. WP:42 is not itself policy, as has often been pointed out, so any change here does not create a compunction to make changes elsewhere.
1194:
This page is so great. The one additional thing I have to tell people is "don't cut and paste; use your own words; use quotation marks around any direct quotes longer than a few words." Does that feel like a common enough issue to be part of LUE?
1170:
That trilogy is amazing, a must read. "And another thing" is, well... bleh. The movie is good too. But like with most of the novel-to-movie adaptions, many jokes, few characters, and a few anecdotes have not made it to the movie. —usernamekiran
324:
1037:
essay oversimplifies the policies and that new users might try to use it to get around NCORP or our guidelines on promotion (as I most often see it used with promo editors). This all makes sense now, and I've self-reverted.
860:
is not so important. Yes, it's helpful if editors put footnotes in the correct format, but if they don't that's just a matter for cleanup. The essential thing we need to encourage them to do is to cite their sources in
39:
512:
and do this, given that this essay is cited so often, particularly to new editors, i want to offer the chance for others to object to this change before I make it, to avoid instability of the essay page.
973:
to mention that this page is not gospel. However, anyone who thinks that this is a definitive statement of everything they need to know is clearly not going to understand the subtleties of either an
768:
746:
390:
385:
380:
110:
106:
102:
844:
and guidelines to read. Keep it to the absolute essential information they need to write a compliant article. Exactly how many links do you think the average SPA is going to follow? The terms
906:
838:
1021:
963:
927:
519:
1123:
1047:
812:
1218:
even specifically references that it's "typically identified at the top of the information page", which might be confusing to users when they look and see that it's not that way here.
1175:
1165:
1066:
990:
944:
508:
I would like to add a 4th substantive section to the page, with the section title "Published". This will explain that cited sources must be published sources. While I could simply be
479:
573:
1141:
876:
615:
818:
The second and third links are already there in the text, and the page is short enough not to merit repeated links. I would link the words "significant coverage" in the sentence
704:
596:
556:
542:
424:
473:
673:
495:
436:
420:
1008:
you're receiving, it's not a crazy suggestion you have. :) There's definitely going to be some "no, not this again," having seen several attempts to subtlely undermine
1291:
657:
24:
1281:
114:
290:
1102:
616:
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Knowledge%3AThe_answer_to_life%2C_the_universe%2C_and_everything&type=revision&diff=827030019&oldid=817517631
1345:
1263:
257:
954:
version was just fine. It doesn't need weasel wording from people who dislike this page, and we already have a note that this page isn't a policy/guideline.
712:
Did you consider that AFC is not the only place this might get transcluded? When someone transcludes this on to a user's talk page they will really want the
1328:
1304:
547:
Many other policies/guidelines/essays are available to spell out the nuances. The key point about this essay is its focus, and that should not be disturbed.
884:
503:
1207:
483:
428:
1236:
286:
267:
1355:
74:
1272:. Some of the people involved in that drama are now indefinitely blocked or have left, so it might be safer to edit the page now.
856:
could go just to start off with. Everyone knows what those words mean and the
Knowledge usage is not out of the ordinary. Even
637:
1087:
Quick question. How is the number 42 connected to this topic? Might be good to explain this in the essay somewhere. Thank you. –
220:
80:
608:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
122:
782:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
198:
804:
760:
696:
591:
414:
1350:
1058:
482:. Please continue working on it there. I have added the draft tags to allow you to submit it when it is ready. Pinging
367:
137:
786:
229:
1154:, it's a fun read. A trilogy in five parts (which makes sense if you remember how the publication sequence went). ~
1268:
The drama from several years ago was annoying enough that most people gave up on editing this page. For example:
935:, would you be fine including the essay template? That would make the same exact point I was trying to make here.
20:
1057:
Not making it worse intentionally was perhaps the most constructive action since 9 April 2010 on this page. –
69:
530:
in the reliable independent sources, could this not be done by tweaking a word or two in the existing text?
190:
165:
1029:, I've self-reverted. I didn't realize how contentious it was, and I was confused by the edit summary of
60:
1277:
959:
902:
624:
Transcluding the page would result in only the box at the top being transcluded. This was done because
350:
93:
826:
be inserted somewhere, as it links to the GNG section of N, of which this page is a simplified version
1185:
319:
233:
579:
1172:
1118:
1097:
871:
791:
Should the highlighted terms "significant coverage", "reliable source", an "independent" link to
741:
568:
1269:
1062:
1043:
940:
923:
1273:
1160:
1150:
particular meme has been around since before most
Wikipedians were born. If you haven't read
1082:
1030:
955:
932:
898:
171:
312:
1316:
1251:
1224:
228:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the
8:
1026:
1014:
432:
50:
1300:
1129:
1109:
1088:
986:
866:
736:
563:
552:
517:
491:
65:
1132:: I'm glad that you figured this out, and now it's time to help out a fellow editor.
1039:
997:
936:
919:
889:
833:
537:
46:
562:
against. What kind of source do you think might get used with the current wording?
427:
I'll give my 100% to adding more information about them. Please undelete them sir .
1155:
977:
tag or a note about dissenting views. Everything is disputed, except the fact that
792:
680:
403:
225:
1311:
1246:
1219:
1053:
914:
893:
509:
466:
330:
363:
133:
1339:
1296:
1212:
982:
633:
548:
514:
487:
453:
445:
1201:
1136:
981:
is often badly misunderstood and a clear alternative is sometimes helpful.
827:
800:
796:
688:
684:
661:
531:
1009:
1004:
978:
754:
729:
667:
651:
643:
627:
695:
Let me know if you have any concerns about these modifications. Thanks,
369:
138:
640:) for easy reference when declining submissions. It is necessary that
1003:
has the potential to confuse, I suppose). It's basically saying what
751:
As I said, it has only been transcluded twice in it's history before
648:
be up-to-date with this page. The only way to ensure that is to have
459:
1108:
Never mind, I figured it out. I am clearly behind on my memes :-) –
588:
365:
135:
276:
212:
184:
1198:
672:
was made- both of which are in talk archives. You can see them
224:, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of
679:
Highlighted terms are linked for easy reference. They link to
664:
has only been transcluded from twice in it's history up until
370:
139:
1292:
Knowledge:The answer to life, the universe, and everything
658:
Knowledge:The answer to life, the universe, and everything
478:
I have undeleted the
Dayanidhi page and moved it to
15:
1337:
25:The answer to life, the universe, and everything
691:respectively. Seems like a common sense change.
809:
765:
701:
1346:Mid-impact WikiProject Knowledge essays pages
587:Close as proposer. Technical solution found:
968:Everything is abused, occasionally. Adding
293:on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.
419:Dear Sir these are real information about
164:does not require a rating on Knowledge's
1338:
717:goes for the other highlighted words.
1152:The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
604:The following discussion is closed.
307:
153:
151:
147:
170:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
13:
1356:WikiProject Knowledge essays pages
885:Remove the "some editors disagree"
660:. This should not be an issue, as
504:Propose adding section "Published"
275:
248:WikiProject Knowledge essays pages
232:. For a listing of essays see the
14:
1367:
218:This page is within the scope of
1052:
778:The discussion above is closed.
343:
311:
211:
197:
183:
152:
121:
40:Click here to start a new topic.
480:Draft:Dayanidhi Paramahansa dev
322:on 2 March 2014. The result of
458:, who deleted these articles.
1:
1012:by proxy here in the past. —
877:14:34, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
839:10:15, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
820:We need significant coverage.
813:02:08, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
769:01:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
747:23:35, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
705:22:34, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
597:02:05, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
37:Put new text under old text.
1208:17:01, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
496:15:20, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
474:15:03, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
437:14:57, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
318:This page was nominated for
262:This page has been rated as
242:Knowledge:WikiProject Essays
221:WikiProject Knowledge essays
7:
865:format in the first place.
425:Candradhoja Paramahansa Dev
415:Please undelete my articles
245:Template:WikiProject Essays
45:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
10:
1372:
1264:21:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
1237:21:51, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
1124:05:08, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
1103:22:45, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
1067:14:57, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
1351:NA-Class Knowledge essays
1329:04:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
1305:04:16, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
1282:02:55, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
1048:05:12, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
1022:05:05, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
991:05:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
964:04:57, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
945:04:53, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
928:04:51, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
907:04:45, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
787:Linking highlighted terms
726:I don't see that keeping
656:directly transclude from
421:Dayanidhi Paramahansa dev
402:This page is archived by
283:
261:
206:
178:
75:Be welcoming to newcomers
780:Please do not modify it.
606:Please do not modify it.
574:10:48, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
557:10:14, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
543:08:15, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
520:23:17, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
1176:18:10, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
1166:21:23, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
1142:21:19, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
1270:Special:Diff/670423310
287:automatically assessed
280:
268:project's impact scale
70:avoid personal attacks
285:The above rating was
279:
115:Auto-archiving period
822:That link, SIGCOV,
638:relevant discussion
1146:Well... I daresay
614:Can be seen here:
607:
281:
166:content assessment
81:dispute resolution
42:
1327:
1262:
1235:
1188:in your own words
1164:
1122:
1101:
632:is being used at
605:
412:
411:
407:
338:
337:
306:
305:
302:
301:
298:
297:
294:
146:
145:
61:Assume good faith
38:
1363:
1326:
1324:
1323:
1320:
1314:
1274:NinjaRobotPirate
1261:
1259:
1258:
1255:
1249:
1234:
1232:
1231:
1228:
1222:
1206:
1204:
1158:
1140:
1116:
1114:
1095:
1093:
1056:
1031:NinjaRobotPirate
1019:
1017:
1001:
956:NinjaRobotPirate
933:NinjaRobotPirate
899:NinjaRobotPirate
836:
811:
807:
767:
763:
758:
733:
703:
699:
671:
655:
647:
631:
594:
580:Proposed changes
540:
464:
457:
449:
401:
371:
347:
346:
340:
339:
315:
308:
284:
250:
249:
246:
243:
240:
226:Knowledge essays
215:
208:
207:
202:
201:
200:
195:
187:
180:
179:
157:
156:
155:
148:
140:
126:
125:
116:
16:
1371:
1370:
1366:
1365:
1364:
1362:
1361:
1360:
1336:
1335:
1321:
1318:
1317:
1312:
1256:
1253:
1252:
1247:
1229:
1226:
1225:
1220:
1215:
1202:
1196:
1192:
1133:
1110:
1089:
1085:
1015:
1013:
995:
892:recently added
887:
834:
805:
789:
784:
783:
761:
752:
727:
697:
665:
649:
641:
625:
610:
601:
600:
599:
592:
582:
538:
506:
470:
460:
451:
443:
417:
408:
372:
366:
344:
247:
244:
241:
238:
237:
234:essay directory
196:
193:
142:
141:
136:
113:
87:
86:
56:
12:
11:
5:
1369:
1359:
1358:
1353:
1348:
1334:
1333:
1332:
1331:
1290:Please regard
1288:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1214:
1211:
1191:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1179:
1178:
1144:
1084:
1081:
1080:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1069:
1027:Rhododendrites
1016:Rhododendrites
993:
915:Template:Essay
894:weasel wording
886:
883:
882:
881:
880:
879:
803:respectively?
788:
785:
777:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
721:
720:
719:
718:
693:
692:
677:
620:To summarize:
613:
611:
602:
586:
585:
584:
583:
581:
578:
577:
576:
559:
545:
505:
502:
501:
500:
499:
498:
468:
416:
413:
410:
409:
400:
399:
396:
395:
394:
393:
388:
383:
375:
374:
373:
368:
364:
362:
361:
348:
336:
335:
325:the discussion
316:
304:
303:
300:
299:
296:
295:
282:
272:
271:
260:
254:
253:
251:
216:
204:
203:
188:
176:
175:
169:
158:
144:
143:
134:
132:
131:
128:
127:
89:
88:
85:
84:
77:
72:
63:
57:
55:
54:
43:
34:
33:
30:
29:
28:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1368:
1357:
1354:
1352:
1349:
1347:
1344:
1343:
1341:
1330:
1325:
1315:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1302:
1298:
1293:
1289:
1283:
1279:
1275:
1271:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1260:
1250:
1243:
1242:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1233:
1223:
1210:
1209:
1205:
1200:
1189:
1177:
1174:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1162:
1157:
1153:
1149:
1145:
1143:
1139:
1138:
1131:
1130:Novem Linguae
1127:
1126:
1125:
1120:
1115:
1113:
1112:Novem Linguae
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1099:
1094:
1092:
1091:Novem Linguae
1083:Meaning of 42
1068:
1064:
1060:
1055:
1051:
1050:
1049:
1045:
1041:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1025:
1024:
1023:
1018:
1011:
1006:
999:
994:
992:
988:
984:
980:
976:
971:
967:
966:
965:
961:
957:
953:
948:
947:
946:
942:
938:
934:
931:
930:
929:
925:
921:
916:
911:
910:
909:
908:
904:
900:
895:
891:
878:
875:
874:
870:
869:
864:
859:
858:add footnotes
855:
851:
850:press release
847:
842:
841:
840:
837:
832:
831:
825:
821:
817:
816:
815:
814:
808:
802:
798:
794:
781:
770:
764:
759:was created.
756:
750:
749:
748:
745:
744:
740:
739:
731:
725:
724:
723:
722:
715:
711:
710:
709:
708:
707:
706:
700:
690:
686:
682:
678:
675:
669:
663:
659:
653:
645:
639:
635:
629:
623:
622:
621:
618:
617:
609:
598:
595:
590:
575:
572:
571:
567:
566:
560:
558:
554:
550:
546:
544:
541:
536:
535:
529:
524:
523:
522:
521:
518:
516:
511:
497:
493:
489:
485:
481:
477:
476:
475:
472:
471:
465:
463:
455:
447:
442:I am pinging
441:
440:
439:
438:
434:
430:
426:
422:
405:
398:
397:
392:
389:
387:
384:
382:
379:
378:
377:
376:
359:
358:
353:
352:
342:
341:
333:
332:
327:
326:
321:
317:
314:
310:
309:
292:
288:
278:
274:
273:
269:
265:
259:
256:
255:
252:
235:
231:
227:
223:
222:
217:
214:
210:
209:
205:
192:
189:
186:
182:
181:
177:
173:
167:
163:
159:
150:
149:
130:
129:
124:
120:
112:
108:
104:
100:
97:
95:
91:
90:
82:
78:
76:
73:
71:
67:
64:
62:
59:
58:
52:
48:
47:Learn to edit
44:
41:
36:
35:
32:
31:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1216:
1193:
1187:
1151:
1147:
1135:
1111:
1090:
1086:
1059:84.46.52.217
1040:TonyBallioni
1034:
998:TonyBallioni
974:
969:
951:
937:TonyBallioni
920:TonyBallioni
890:TonyBallioni
888:
872:
867:
862:
857:
853:
849:
845:
829:
823:
819:
790:
779:
742:
737:
713:
694:
619:
612:
603:
569:
564:
533:
527:
507:
467:
461:
418:
355:
349:
329:
323:
263:
219:
172:WikiProjects
162:project page
161:
118:
92:
19:This is the
1156:Anachronist
404:ClueBot III
1340:Categories
1213:Essay box?
952:status quo
264:Mid-impact
230:discussion
194:Mid‑impact
806:AdA&D
793:WP:SIGCOV
762:AdA&D
698:AdA&D
681:WP:SIGCOV
593:AdA&D
528:published
484:Rexfaster
429:Rexfaster
331:snow keep
83:if needed
66:Be polite
21:talk page
1297:Johnuniq
983:Johnuniq
913:include
868:Spinning
738:Spinning
589:Help:LST
565:Spinning
549:Johnuniq
488:Primefac
454:Primefac
446:RHaworth
351:Archives
320:deletion
94:Archives
51:get help
1137:CX Zoom
854:tabloid
835:(talk),
830:Noyster
539:(talk),
534:Noyster
510:WP:BOLD
266:on the
119:90 days
1322:Jester
1257:Jester
1230:Jester
1173:(talk)
852:, and
824:should
799:, and
714:entire
687:, and
634:WP:AfC
289:using
239:Essays
191:Essays
168:scale.
975:essay
970:essay
873:Spark
801:WP:IS
797:WP:RS
743:Spark
689:WP:IS
685:WP:RS
662:WP:42
570:Spark
357:Index
160:This
99:Index
79:Seek
27:page.
1319:SWAT
1301:talk
1278:talk
1254:SWAT
1227:SWAT
1186:...
1161:talk
1148:that
1119:talk
1098:talk
1063:talk
1044:talk
1035:this
1010:WP:N
1005:WP:N
987:talk
979:WP:N
960:talk
941:talk
924:talk
903:talk
863:some
846:spin
674:here
553:talk
492:talk
462:Reyk
450:and
433:talk
423:and
328:was
291:data
68:and
1020:\\
515:DES
469:YO!
258:Mid
1342::
1303:)
1280:)
1199:SJ
1197:–
1065:)
1046:)
989:)
962:)
943:)
926:)
905:)
848:,
828::
795:,
757:}}
755:42
753:{{
732:}}
730:42
728:{{
683:,
670:}}
668:42
666:{{
654:}}
652:42
650:{{
646:}}
644:42
642:{{
630:}}
628:42
626:{{
555:)
532::
494:)
486:.
435:)
360:)
117::
109:,
105:,
101:,
49:;
1313:⇒
1299:(
1276:(
1248:⇒
1221:⇒
1203:+
1190:?
1163:)
1159:(
1134:—
1128:@
1121:)
1117:(
1100:)
1096:(
1061:(
1042:(
1000::
996:@
985:(
958:(
939:(
922:(
901:(
810:★
766:★
702:★
676:.
636:(
551:(
490:(
456::
452:@
448::
444:@
431:(
406:.
391:3
386:2
381:1
354:(
334:.
270:.
236:.
174::
111:3
107:2
103:1
96::
53:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
