[Mageia-discuss] page of Mageia in wikipedia (in english) has been deleted

Fri May 18 16:57:31 CEST 2012

On Fri, 18 May 2012 10:43:01 -0300
+Macxi <terraagua at gmail.com> wrote:
+
+> Doug, 
+> 
+> As the suggestion of several people, I'm subscribing in the list
+> Marcom - Mageia-marketing (Mageia marketing team discussion list)
+> 
+> https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-marketing
+> 
+> There are two pages with news about mageia:
+> https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Archive:Initial_press_release_on_the_Mageia_fork
+> https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Mageia1_Press
+> 
+> In category of the "press":
+> https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Category:Press
+> 
+> I think it is necessary to create a page about Mageia2_Press, or
+> Mageia_2_Press.
+> 
+> Thanks for your suggestions
+> 
+> Cheers
+> Macxi
+> 
+> 
+> Em qui 17 mai 2012, às 23:17:06, Doug Laidlaw escreveu:
+> > On Thu, 17 May 2012 19:59:00 -0300
+> > 
+> > Macxi <terraagua at gmail.com> wrote:
+> > > Hi,
+> > > 
+> > > The page of Mageia in wkipedia  (in english) has been deleted in
+> > > May 13, 2012.
+> > > 
+> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mageia
+> > > 
+> > > The report of the decision here:
+> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mageia
+> > > 
+> > > I mentioned this in the Fórum Mageia, topic "Re: mageia
+> > > information (wikipedia):"
+> > > https://forums.mageia.org/en/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=2428#p18065
+> > > 
+> > > I'm worried because  many people will look for information about
+> > > mageia next week, when the Mageia 2 is released, and I really like
+> > > the wikipedia and I think an important source of information for
+> > > everyone who wants to learn more about Mageia,
+> > > 
+> > > I suggest create a page "Mageia 2 Press" in Mageia Wiki: (
+> > > https://wiki.mageia.org/en/Category:Mageia_2 ) and request the
+> > > reactivation of the page.
+> > > 
+> > > Macxi
+> > 
+> > I suggest that before doing that, you look at the reasons for its
+> > deletion, and that a new page answering the criticisms be
+> > prepared.  I have edited an article (a minor edit) but I can't do
+> > one from scratch, it needs somebody better informed than a distant
+> > user, and whose mind isn't turning to jelly (I will be 70 next
+> > year; does that make me a candidate for the oldest user?)  The page
+> > itself needs a certain structure, with a summary to introduce the
+> > main article, although sometimes, that isn't obvious.  I looked up
+> > Hoover of England once. The editors didn't like that page because
+> > it was too much like advertising.
+> > 
+> > Wikipedia always say that they don't want first-hand information or
+> > an author's personal preferences.  They want sources themselves to
+> > be encyclopedia-like.  If you have a break-through idea, you can't
+> > put it up until it is in research journals.  That can be difficult
+> > for something brand new.
+> > 
+> > Doug.
+> 
+> !DSPAM:4fb65312245801713227817!
+> 
+
+I will leave it to you.  Perhaps the objections can't be sustained; I
+didn't see the original pages.  But they suggest that standards were
+not met.  Being on a list where these things are talked about, will be
+an advantage, of course.
+
+Doug.
+