| Revision as of 05:52, 17 September 2012 editFences and windows (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators50,392 edits →Okay?: Closed now← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 09:06, 28 December 2024 edit undoWoahglaceon (talk | contribs)35 edits →ED Downtime: ReplyTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit Reply |
| (429 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Talk header|noarchive=yes}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Websites|class=C|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Internet culture |class=C |importance=mid }} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Comedy |class=C |importance=mid }} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Misplaced Pages|class=C|importance=mid}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Controversial}} |
|
{{Controversial}} |
|
|
{{Notice|{{find}}}} |
|
{{not a forum}} |
|
{{not a forum}} |
|
{{Connected contributor|Michaeldsuarez|editedhere=yes|declared=yes}} |
|
|
{{FAQ}} |
|
{{FAQ}} |
|
|
{{Old XfD multi |
|
{{multidel |
|
|
|
| date = January 9 2011 |
|
|list= |
|
|
|
| result = '''Speedy keep''' |
|
* '''Speedy keep''', January 9 2011, ] |
|
|
|
| link = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Encyclopedia_Dramatica_(5th_nomination) |
|
* '''Speedy keep''', February 15 2009, ] |
|
|
|
| date2 = February 15 2009 |
|
|oldlist= |
|
|
|
| result2 = '''Speedy keep''' |
|
* '''Speedy keep''', July 19 2008, ] |
|
|
|
| link2 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Encyclopedia_Dramatica_(4th_nomination) |
|
* '''Keep''', May 19 2008, ] |
|
|
|
| date3 = July 19 2008 |
|
* '''Allow recreation''', May 8 2008, ] |
|
|
|
| result3 = '''Speedy keep''' |
|
* '''Keep Deleted (speedy close)''', May 7 2008, ] |
|
|
|
| link3 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Encyclopedia_Dramatica_(3rd_nomination) |
|
* '''Keep Deleted (speedy close)''', May 3 2008, ] |
|
|
|
| date4 = May 19 2008 |
|
* '''Keep Deleted''', March 6 2008, ] |
|
|
|
| result4 = '''Keep''' |
|
* '''Keep Deleted''', February 6 2008, ] |
|
|
|
| link4 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Encyclopedia_Dramatica_(2nd_nomination) |
|
* '''Keep Deleted''', January 10 2008, ] |
|
|
|
| date5 = May 8 2008 |
|
* '''Keep Deleted (speedy close)''', December 8 2007, ] |
|
|
|
| result5 = '''Allow recreation''' |
|
* '''Keep Deleted''', October 3 2007, ] |
|
|
|
| link5 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_May_8 |
|
* '''Keep Deleted (speedy close)''', September 8 2007, ] |
|
|
|
| date6 = May 7 2008 |
|
* '''Keep Deleted''', July 23 2007, ] |
|
|
* '''Keep Deleted (speedy close)''', April 29 2007, ] |
|
| result6 = '''Keep Deleted (speedy close)''' |
|
|
| link6 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_May_7 |
|
* '''Keep Deleted''', April 23 2007, ] |
|
|
|
| date7 = May 3 2008 |
|
* '''Keep Deleted''', November 18 2006, ] |
|
|
|
| result7 = '''Keep Deleted (speedy close)''' |
|
* '''Keep Deleted''', October 28 2006, ] |
|
|
|
| link7 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_May_3 |
|
* '''Keep Deleted''', September 5 2006, ] |
|
|
|
| date8 = March 6 2008 |
|
* '''Deletion Endorsed''', July 23 2006, ] |
|
|
|
| result8 = '''Keep Deleted''' |
|
* '''Delete''', July 23 2006, ] |
|
|
|
| link8 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_March_6 |
|
* '''No consensus''', March 30, 2006, ] |
|
|
|
| date9 = February 6 2008 |
|
* '''Keep''', June 8 2005, ] |
|
|
|
| result9 = '''Keep Deleted''' |
|
* '''Delete''', December 18 2004, ] |
|
|
|
| link9 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_February_6 |
|
|
| date10 = January 10 2008 |
|
|
| result10 = '''Keep Deleted''' |
|
|
| link10 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_January_10 |
|
|
| date11 = December 8 2007 |
|
|
| result11 = '''Keep Deleted (speedy close)''' |
|
|
| link11 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_December_8 |
|
|
| date12 = October 3 2007 |
|
|
| result12 = '''Keep Deleted''' |
|
|
| link12 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_October_3 |
|
|
| date13 = September 8 2007 |
|
|
| result13 = '''Keep Deleted (speedy close)''' |
|
|
| link13 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_September_8 |
|
|
| date14 = July 23 2007 |
|
|
| result14 = '''Keep Deleted''' |
|
|
| link14 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_July_23 |
|
|
| date15 = April 29 2007 |
|
|
| result15 = '''Keep Deleted (speedy close)''' |
|
|
| link15 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_April_29 |
|
|
| date16 = April 23 2007 |
|
|
| result16 = '''Keep Deleted''' |
|
|
| link16 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_April_23 |
|
|
| date17 = November 18 2006 |
|
|
| result17 = '''Keep Deleted''' |
|
|
| link17 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Recently_concluded_(2006_November) |
|
|
| date18 = October 28 2006 |
|
|
| result18 = '''Keep Deleted''' |
|
|
| link18 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Recently_concluded_(2006_October) |
|
|
| date19 = September 5 2006 |
|
|
| result19 = '''Keep Deleted''' |
|
|
| link19 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Recently_concluded_(2006_September) |
|
|
| date20 = July 23 2006 |
|
|
| result20 = '''Deletion Endorsed''' |
|
|
| link20 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Recently_concluded_(2006_July) |
|
|
| date21 = July 23 2006 |
|
|
| result21 = '''Delete''' |
|
|
| link21 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Dramatica_(3rd_nomination) |
|
|
| date22 = March 30, 2006 |
|
|
| result22 = '''No consensus''' |
|
|
| link22 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Encyclopaedia_Dramatica |
|
|
| date23 = June 8 2005 |
|
|
| result23 = '''Keep''' |
|
|
| link23 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Dramatica |
|
|
| date24 = December 18 2004 |
|
|
| result24 = '''Delete''' |
|
|
| link24 = //en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Encyclopedia_Dramatica |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|1= |
|
{{Notice|{{find}}}} |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Websites|importance=mid|computing-importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Internet culture |importance=mid }} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Comedy |importance=mid }} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Misplaced Pages|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Books|referencework=yes}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Connected contributor|Michaeldsuarez|editedhere=yes|declared=yes|banned=yes}} |
|
|
{{banner holder|collapsed=yes|text=Many Afd links|1= |
|
|
}}<!--other banners--> |
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn |
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn |
|
|target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes |
|
|target=/Archive index |mask=/Archive <#> |leading_zeros=0 |indexhere=yes |
| Line 45: |
Line 94: |
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
|maxarchivesize = 100K |
|
|maxarchivesize = 100K |
|
|counter = 23 |
|
|counter = 25 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 3 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 3 |
|
|algo = old(60d) |
|
|algo = old(60d) |
|
|archive = Talk:Encyclopedia Dramatica/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive = Talk:Encyclopedia Dramatica/Archive %(counter)d |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{Archives |auto=yes |search=yes |bot=MiszaBot I |age=2 |units=months |index=/Archive index }} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Past tense agenda.... == |
|
|
|
|
|
I just came across this article and noted immediately that it's a load of hot air. Firstly why is EA referred to in the past tense, when its website the first choice before this link in a google search? Secondly why does it purport that "several mirrors" exist when there are actually none of note, only the Encyclopedia Dramatica.se site? Thirdly, as I can see from the talk archives, whenever this point is raised there seems to be a POV-derived campaign to deny the existence that EA existed after DeGrippo pulled the plug in favor of OhInternet? |
|
|
|
|
|
In my view the logic on show here is nothing shy of POV pushing. Firstly just because something closes and then restarts does not mean it does not exist. Secondly the fact is does exist but is not in use/manufacture does not preclude it from being talked of in the present tense. For example, people no longer ride horses to work, they therefore were not beasts of burden because they remain beasts of burden. Likewise the ending of a TV series does not it "was" a TV series because it will always exist as long as no one destroys all the copies. However a lost film could be referred to as "was" because it really is "was" as there is nothing else like it. |
|
|
|
|
|
On reading this article, it could be surmised that EA existed, was withdrawn and then "several mirrors" (i.e. many pale imitations were spawned) began but they were not the original EA. Hardly, the EA.se website is just as much like the old one. It therefore seems completely misleading and ridiculous to suggest that the original was the only one. TBH after reading EA's article about WIkipedia, I have to admit beyond the hate and bile, there are some very fair observations about this site, its users and its creator Mr Wales. I can only concur that with such criticism even Misplaced Pages is not immune to altering history ''a la'' totalitarian regime. |
|
|
|
|
|
The point of this article seems to be, there was only one EA created by DeGrippo and anything else is not real! EA is a meme, it exists to troll and it does not matter how many portals, or reincarnations of it exist. I suggest the people who defend this article's slant take their high horses over to pages on religions, for instance Christianity. I would like them to use their logic |
|
|
to decry sectarianism, for surely the Church established by Christ has absolutely nothing to do with Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodoxy, Protestantism because all the latter denominations were all created long after the original church ceased to exist. |
|
|
|
|
|
It makes me think that DeGrippo is being treated like a messianic figurehead whose ownership of an idea far outweighs the subscribers to that idea! Go on, trot over to Christianity and tell all those believers that their churches are false as they worship versions that were not created directly by Jesus. DeGrippo lost control of the thing she created, that does not mean the idea she spawned ended with her too. Until you get your heads around that this page will be permanently blocked from editing. Not because of stupid swearing but because it is patently not true.! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 10:48, 24 April 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
:This has been discussed many times before. Sherrod DeGrippo created the ed.com site in 2004, but lost interest and stopped hosting it in 2011. There is now an accurate mirror of most of the old ed.com content at encyclopediadramatica.se, but this is not the same website, any more than mirrors of Misplaced Pages content are the same as Misplaced Pages.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 11:12, 24 April 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::*Slap of the forehead heard around the world*. Just because DeGrippo started the site does not means that she owned the idea. Benz created the gasoline engine, does that mean all cars that use a petroleum-piston-driven engine must be referred to in the past tense. It seems to me that again the POV pusher rears their head. This perpetual argument seems to derive from ownership. DeGrippo invented a site called Encylopedia Dramatica (e.g. Thomas Edison invented the light bulb, Louis Pasteur invented innoculations; Voltaire invented the electronic circuit; the Earl of Sandwich gave his name to the sandwich). All of things had a creator but none their creations are referred in the past tense because their creator is no more. The keepers of the sacred seal on this article seem to be unable to seperate ownership from usage! This logic befuddles me. The whole story of this site is thus: DeGrippo created the site, she walked away, the site continued. The content of the site has not changed, neither has the way to edit or its purpose. In fact unlike the examples of invention, I have made, EA remains exactly as it has always been !! So what is the problem?? POV pure and simple. The lede should be something like this: "Encyclopædia Dramatica '''''is''''' a satirical open wiki that was launched on December 10, 2004. The site, which uses MediaWiki software, lampoons both encyclopedic topics and current events, especially those related or relevant to contemporary internet culture. It was created and managed by Sherrod DeGrippo until she relinquished control in 2011." This is not rocket science. Just the facts. ] (]) 09:36, 28 April 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::* A better analogy would be if you were referring to the specific engine that Benz built, in which case you would be referring to it in the past tense, because you are referring to the one single, specific engine. Similarly here, we are referring to the specific satirical wiki Encyclopedia Dramatica.com, which I think we can all agree is not in use anymore. Just typing in the URL would tell you that (and you'd end up at Oh Internet). <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 18:59, 28 April 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::* The title of this article is Encyclopedia Dramatica, not encyclopediadramatica.com. --] (]) 11:59, 6 May 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:''"Just because DeGrippo started the site does not means that she owned the idea."'' |
|
|
:Actually it does. DeGrippo owns the intellectual property for the idea, and she retains ownership of the content. The ED copyright license for contributed content was not free. The mirror sites are infringing. ] (]) |
|
|
::Really? we would love to hear her to claim ownership herself. This whole time she has been distancing herself from taking responsibility for the entire site's contents, but now she retains ownership? Please, it would be an honor to hear that from Sherrod's own mouth. --] (]) 12:57, 31 May 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
I also think it shouldn't be presented in the past tense. It doesn't matter if the owner walked away or that it now says ".se" instead of ".com". Do we need to resort to a vote in order to resolve this? ] (]) 22:43, 27 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:Misplaced Pages is not about votes on what people want. The problem is that a large amount of the sourcing refers to the ed.com site, not ed.se. Although the current round of edits is unhelpful, there is no "past tense agenda".--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 05:09, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::You can easily find sources referring to the current Encyclopaedia Dramatica. ] (]) 05:26, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::Also, the sources refer to Encyclopaedia Dramatica, not Encyclopeadia Dramatica.com. ] (]) 05:33, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::True, but ed.se did not exist in 2004, and there is less sourcing referring directly to the .se era than .com. I've tried to avoid setting off circular editing on this, but the article needs to accept that .com and .se are not the same sites.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 05:35, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Well it's a good thing that the article isn't named "EncyclopaediaDramatica.com". ] (]) 06:07, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::I'm sorry, but just because the title doesn't specifically say .com doesn't mean that isn't what it is talking about. The first line says that ED is a satirical open wiki that uses MediaWiki software that was launched on December 10, 2004. Was ED.se launched in 2004? <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 06:21, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Was ED.se created by Sherrod Degrippo? Does ED.com go to ED.se? <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 06:22, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::The real risk is confusing a first-time reader who is not as clued up on all of this as the regular editors. The article should make clear that there have been two main eras for the site: ed.com (2004-2011) and ed.ch/se (2011-present). The "is or was?" debate is becoming stale, but unfamiliar readers should not be given the impression that ed.se was launched in 2004.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 07:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::I completely agree. Really, I don't feel the current sectioning of the article is really the best way to do it anyways. Really, we need to split the content section into content and then a history section, which are completely separate things. And then Oh Internet and ED.se could go as subsections under the history section. I think that's a better way to do it than the way the article currently is. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 08:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*Regarding "a large amount of the sourcing refers to the ed.com", that is...I don't even know ''what'' to call it. Sources refer to "Encyclopedia Dramatica", period, full stop; what its URL happens to be is not even ''secondary'', it is simply ''irrelevant''. When sources discuss ED material in the present day, as Ars Technica does, that pretty much confers legitimacy on the present-day website. Things move, things fork. They don't become illegitimate once they do as long as they meet our notability guides. If "Oh Internet" someday gets reliable source attention, then it will qualify for an article of its own too. We'll note the split in the history section here and provide a pointer to that article. ED is a functional, active website, here and now. That fact ruffles some feathers, but life ain't fair. ] (]) 13:14, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:* <s>I don't know why you're referencing the Ars Technica article, as all that says is "Writing on the meme wiki Encyclopedia Dramatica earlier this year", with earlier this year being before ED was shut down, so it is referring to ED.com. Furthermore,</s> as has been already explained before on this talk page, what else would ED.se be referred to as? They picked the same exact name, so if one is going to refer to the site, they will just say ED, but that doesn't make it ED.com. And, yes, you're right, ED is a functional, active website, it's called Oh Internet. Any of the arguments you can use for ED.se can also be used for Oh Internet. That's the issue. Which is why it was decided in the past that both Oh Internet and ED.se are just separate sites, sites that split from ED.com, yes, but not the same thing as it. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 02:47, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::Oh Internet is not ED. Being a redirect is irrelevant. This article is on Encyclopaedia Dramatica; it's still in existence. A change from ".com" to ".se" is even more irrelevant. Until a move to "EncyclopaediaDramatica.com" is established, then it stays in the present tense. ] (]) 04:48, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::In the immediate aftermath of DeGrippo ditching the site, there were several forks and mirrors all claiming to be the true successor, and it was unclear if any of them would last for very long. The mirror at ed.ch (later .se) has by far the best claim to be the true successor, but it is run by different people and is not the same site.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 11:54, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I wonder how has this peculiar rule of "different owner means different organization" came about, and how selectively it is being applied project-wide. The case here is rather straight-forward; a project was abandoned, the project was picked up by another user, reliable sources still refer to it and cite it in articles under the same name. That's all there ios here. Owners change and addresses change over time. The product, when it can be ] by ], is constant. ] people like Seren here have argued for years for keeping the most absurd articles, from helicopter cats to JetBlue flight attendants to Lord knows what else. Yet here, it is the ultimate of nattering nitpicks. ] (]) 16:33, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Except the owner of the organization didn't abandon it, but instead changed the name and the rules of what proper content is. DeGrippo still owns ED.com. She is still in charge of it. The people editing Oh Internet are, as far as can be seen, are still the same community. Not all of them, clearly. Then the rest went to create other offshoots, of which ED.se has become the most prominent. However, that doesn't make it the same at all. Oh Internet and ED.se are at the same level and should be presented the same. Since they both can't be presented as being ED, it's better to just call them both splits from the original. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 00:35, 2 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::It depends how you interpret what happened. I would describe it as: DeGrippo abandoned ED and created a new website. ED was then continued with a different owner. This article is on ED, and if Oh Internet gets enough attention, then it deserves it's own article with a brief mention of the history of the site which would involve ED. ] (]) 05:01, 2 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::That's another issue. How can you say that someone else continued it when DeGrippo still owns the copyright for it. As has been pointed out before, ED.se remains a complete copyright violation of ED.com, in name, logo, and its content, since ED.com's copyright page stated that all content added was then copyright to ED.com and not to the content adder (unlike how Misplaced Pages works). That's one of the main reasons why .ch and .se were used in the first place, as it is much harder to stick a copyright claim to foreign internet providers. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 05:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::Can we stop wasting time with this issue? We're building an encyclopaedia and the copyright rules they're violating is irrelevant. ] (]) 05:40, 2 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::I was just using it as an example of how the situation is complicated and that both directions have arguments. It is far better just to have both ED.se and Oh Internet be separate sections and then, eventually, separate articles. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 07:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::I reckon treat Oh Internet as separate to ED and .se and .com as minor details regarding the same encyclopaedia. ] (]) 16:18, 2 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::The community splitting over two different Wikis, Degrippo still owning ED.com, .se going through multiple owners hands time and again because one is arrested and the others are likely to be, and even changing server locations because of a copyright claim catching hold on the .ch server because .ch/.se are copyright violations of ED.com are minor details? <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 22:01, 2 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::Yep. ] (]) 22:19, 2 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::Yes, quite minor. You can't seem to come to grips with the fact that reliable sources refer to the present website as ED. Not a fork, not a mirror, no analogies to a ] team smuggled away in the night. Encyclopedia Dramatica is now located at the .se address, that's all there is to it. As for the copyright issue, that's really beyond your ability or knowledge to offer commentary on. But apart from that, it has no bearing on editorial decisions here, otherwise the articles for ] and ] would be in trouble. ] (]) 22:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
{{outdent}}Silver Seren is right that DeGrippo probably still holds the copyright on the 2004-11 material, but there needs to be reliable sourcing to make this an issue worth mentioning in the article.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 05:48, 3 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:If sourcing is found making mention of some copyright issue, by all means put it in the article. It seems tho that it is being used by some as some sort of argument against acknowledging the legitimacy of the current website and owners. ] (]) 13:09, 5 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I see we're just not going to be able to agree on anything here, since we have pretty much opposing opinions on what to do with this article. However, that means then that you need to reach a consensus to make the change, per ]. The two of you and the two of us is just a stalemate. The other reverters were Zaiger and 8nate. Zaiger, being an ED Government member, would have to be taken with a grain of salt and 8nate turned out to be a sockpuppet. So, at this point, there needs to be an RfC or something for this change to remain. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 08:38, 3 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Boing Boing == |
|
|
|
|
|
BoingBoing to ED se as "Encyclopedia Dramatica", without any qualifier, such as "fork", "unofficial continuation", etc. it seems like everyone has now acknowledged ED se as Encyclopedia Dramatica except Misplaced Pages. -'']'' 08:05, 31 May 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:That's because referring to a mirror as a mirror over and over again is a bit redundant. ] (]) 11:48, 3 June 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::You don't get to ] what a source means when it states something, unfortunately. So that's one source so far, and IMO if we see it referenced this way in another then all the "past tense" and "defunct" bullshit is coming out of this article. ] (]) 14:08, 3 June 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::ED.se chose for its name to also be Encyclopedia Dramatica, so it's proper to refer to it as that, but that doesn't make it this Encyclopedia Dramatica. An example is if Misplaced Pages shut down and a new site was created that decided to also use the name Misplaced Pages. While, in the beginning, news sources might called it mirror or fork, eventually, they would just call it Misplaced Pages. But that doesn't make it this Misplaced Pages. |
|
|
|
|
|
:::And i'm not going into copied content and userbase and all of that, because then you have to bring in Oh Internet and it's a big mess. This is just a simple example. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 15:28, 3 June 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::A recently published book on the subject of Anonymous appears to discuss Encyclopedia Dramatica in some substantial manner, but as of this moment I have only seen the book's index here: ; the book has already been reviewed by big media sources, and I'll make some efforts to find and include any information that may be relevant to this article, although someone else could go ahead and do the same. As far as the discussion above, I would argue that ED.se is the same ''site'' as ED.com, which just moved to a new ''server'' after a bunch of wacky drama. The fact that the original server address now points to Oh Internet isn't as messy as one would think really, and I think the article's present structure would only need to be moderately modified. (Oh Internet only appears notable in itself through its association with Encyclopedia Dramatica, and so it's justified to keep it as a section in this article relevant to ED's total history.) ] (]) 16:18, 3 June 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::It's really not that simple. You also have to factor in that the owner changed the site to Oh Internet and that some users went and made the other site and, no matter how much it's protested that its not, illegally copied the content from Oh Internet. I mean, that's why it's on servers like .ch and .se, you can't get it taken down easily from those places. Not to mention that the userbase did split, some of the userbase is still at Oh Internet, which really does count more for being a continuation if we're going that route. But we're not. The situation is already complicated enough without involving all of that. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 23:19, 3 June 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::Though that book looks like it's going to be good for a number of article subjects. It has a good publisher and a rather notable author, good find. The question is whether it's discussing the beginning history of ED, which means it's discussing .com or if it's discussing stuff since the server switch. If the latter, I think that info would be more than enough to finally split out ED.se into its own article. If the former, well...that's useful for that and just that. We'll have to see. When's it coming out? <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 23:25, 3 June 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::source plz? especially the 'illegal' part. imo this seems like a non-neutral opinion. -'']'' 07:34, 4 June 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::It ''is'' just my opinion, though I think a few early on sources (maybe it was one of the Daily Dot ones?) mentioned how ED was under copyright and that DeGrippo had been sending takedown notices for ED.se (.ch back then) because of the violation. Not sure how that all turned out. If i'm remembering correctly, the takedown notices worked at one point, but they just changed service providers (or servers) to get out of it. Along with changing who was the registered owner, I believe. It would certainly be nice if a news source made a clear timeline of it all, but alas. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 08:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:In addition to the BoingBoing mention, pp. 317-318 of Parmy Olson's book ''We Are Anonymous'' states that Ryan Cleary helped host Encyclopedia Dramatica, and "served as an administrator" of Encyclopedia Dramatica. The book says nothing about Cleary hosting "a mirror". I don't know if this is relevant, but more and more sources show that the new site is accepted, at least by this group, as Encyclopedia Dramatica. ] (]) 22:45, 16 June 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::It's interesting to note that Olson's book generally refers to ED in the past-tense (in the style of this Misplaced Pages article), but then also mentions that Cleary hosted ED on his servers and was also an admin -- does anyone recall offhand whether he had been an admin on ED.com or just ED.ch? There's no description at all regarding the circumstances behind his hosting the site, no indication that he hadn't hosted the site over a long-term period, and the lack of detail could confuse a reader of the book unfamiliar with the subject especially as there's no specific discussion of the domain transition. That is, most references to ED in the book would appear to refer specifically to ED.com, except then there's that passage about Ryan which makes it murky. If we're referring to ED as something that Cleary hosted, we shouldn't also be referring to the site as if it were defunct (which would be the limited interpretation of ED.com as a "real ED"), so that's a sort of inconsistency in the book to note. ] (]) 16:43, 28 June 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Actually, in the glossary of the book, ED is in the present tense. ] (]) 14:09, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Press release from Daniel Brandt == |
|
|
|
|
|
http://cryptome.org/2012/07/cloudflare-watch.htm – Daniel Brandt apparently sent a press release about a new website of his to ], which is a website for privacy advocates. He also talks about why he became interested in Encyclopedia Dramatica in the release: |
|
|
|
|
|
<blockquote>My interest in CloudFlare came from my battle with Encyclopedia Dramatica. This started in mid-2010 with a bio on me on encyclopediadramatica.com that Sherrod DeGrippo refused to take down when I asked her nicely. So I helped a friend start the site josephevers.blogspot.com to research the anonymous admins behind ED. It had some impact -- ED.com was abandoned by DeGrippo in April 2011, in favor of a mild meme site at ohinternet.com.</blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
. Feel free to look over the changes. |
|
|
|
|
|
One thing to keep in mind is that in the press release, Brandt claims that Sherrod "refused" to take the article down, but according to that Brandt published on the Misplaced Pages Review, Brandt said, |
|
|
|
|
|
<blockquote>I was informed by insider that the Queen got my email, didn't recognize my name, and then informed this insider that she (the Queen) had decided not to reply to me.</blockquote> |
|
|
|
|
|
It seems to be a case of Sherrod not caring ("didn't recognize name") or not wanting to interact with Brandt rather than outright refusing to delete the article. As a result, I used the words "chose to ignore" in the article. --] (]) 13:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:Right now that section heavily implies that Brandt was the reason ED.com got closed down. Didn't DeGrippo dispute this? If so, we should probably mention that in the paragraph. --]|] 14:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::I don't believe that Sherrod ever mentioned Daniel Brandt in public. The paragraph only mentions the original ED's closure once, so I wouldn't call it "heavily implies". --] (]) 14:22, 9 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::That's kind of my point: It offers the reader one single possibility for ED's closure. If we talk about ED's closure, we ought to mention all the possible reasons. It's just a minor quibble, but that's what caught my eye. :) --]|] 14:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::. --] (]) 14:47, 9 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I have emails from her where she admits it if anyone is interested. She was literally scared for her life. --] (]) 03:35, 31 July 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Fox News article links to ED (yes, .se) == |
|
|
|
|
|
At , ED is used as a citation for the fact that "Fae" being Van Haeften's Misplaced Pages username. ] (]) 16:21, 1 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:How exactly is that useful here? <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 01:32, 5 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::More evidence that the present website is indeed "Encyclopedia Dramatica", as cited by yet another reliable source. Yet another nail in the "past tense agenda". ] (]) 01:53, 5 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I just did a Ctrl+F search just to be sure, but the name Encyclopedia Dramatica is never used in the article. There is a link to ED.se in the article, but a link doesn't mean anything. I don't see how it has anything to do with the "past tense agenda". The only use a link in a news article is without accompanying discussion in the article is when a news article links to Misplaced Pages and then we add the article to the Media mentions template on the article subject talk page. Other than that, a link is completely meaningless. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 03:01, 5 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::The link is all that matters in this case. ] (]) 12:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I'm calling bullshit on seren here. He is totally ] this article. Nobody can make any changes without going through him first, it's totally counterproductive and he should really find something more in his interest to hover over and stalk changes. It's like he is a one man committee, nobody can make any changes without getting his personal approval. Misplaced Pages isn't supposed to work this way. He has an agenda and it is poisonous to the growth of this article and the project as a whole. --] (]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 08:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
::It's disappointing that Silver seren changed "is" back to "was". The ed.se site is the '']'' successor to ed.com, at least in terms of content hosting.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 09:05, 7 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::I hadn't checked this for months. I like the new wording of "mirrored and continued" in the infobox. Months ago we could still have doubts about the successor of ED, but now it's clear that .se has become the replacement as the new ED. --] (]) 10:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::The issue is the very few sources actually discussing this. Besides the Daily Dot articles way back at the beginning, pretty much everything else is just mentioning ED.se and that's it. Not discussing it to any extent that helps. This is exemplified by the fact that there is really nothing more that can be added to the .se section in the article and, as can be seen, other than the Cleary controversy and the .se site going down and being covered in the one Daily Dot article, there's nothing else. And, it's quite easy to start a request for comment. Do that. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 08:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::{{done}} --] (]) 09:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
===Rfc: Is Encyclopedia Dramatica dead?=== |
|
|
{{archivetop|1=RfC result is clear - the .se site is the current ''de facto'' site for Encyclopedia Dramatica, and so Encyclopedia Dramatica should be referred to in the current tense, and encyclopediadramatica.com in the past. No apparent consensus on how to cover Oh Internet. ]<span style="background-color:white; color:#808080;">&</span>] 05:50, 17 September 2012 (UTC)}} |
|
|
encyclopediadramatica'''.com''' was closed, but all the articles were mirrored in encyclopediadramatica'''.se''', who has a different owner. Should we speak of Encyclopedia Dramatica in the present (.se is a website) or in the past (.com was a website)? ] (]) 09:01, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:No it is not dead, Silver seren is in the minority over this issue. The ] should make clear that there was a split in April 2011, but referring to the site in the past tense is not the best approach.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 09:08, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:Just to give a bit of history here, the original ED.com was closed by its owner, and the original URL was redirected to a new site (Oh Internet). The community split up over this, some going to Oh Internet, some creating various mirrors of ED from their cache and the internet archive (without permission from the original owner). Eventually, ED.ch was established as the alternative/new version of ED. ED.ch was closed due to TOS violations, so ED.se was created, which remains active until today, with completely different owners compared to the now dead ED.com. --]|] 12:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:There are many reliable sources that refer to ed.se as Encyclopedia Dramatica at present. Also the whole userbase is at .se, and most of the staff save for maybe half a dozen out of 30 or so people (with more returning to ed.se almost daily). And while it may be completely different owners, those owners were known users or staff on ed.com. Sherrod (the old owner) threw away Encyclopedia Dramatica and we simply saved it from the dumpster, washed it off, and resumed business as usual. ED.se is Encyclopedia Dramatica. --] (]) 16:09, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::It would probably be a good idea to gather all the sources referring ED.se as the current ED for those with no familiarity with all this. The point of an RfC is to get outside opinions, after all. --]|] 16:27, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::These should be more than good enough: |
|
|
*http://www.dailydot.com/culture/encyclopedia-dramatica-returns/ |
|
|
*http://www.dailydot.com/news/encyclopedia-dramatica-suffers-minor-outage/ |
|
|
*http://www.dailydot.com/news/encyclopedia-dramatica-outage/ --] (]) 16:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:*http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/finding-the-mystery-man-behind-funnyjunk/ was mentioned earlier. Adding that to the list. Also on another note, is anybody besides SilverSeren actually arguing this, or is it just an attempt at expanding an edit war between him and multiple others? ] (]) 19:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::I have a question on this topic. Doesn't ] only apply in ''preventing'' edit wars or removing vandalism, not promoting them? |
|
|
::BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes. Don't invoke BRD as your reason for reverting someone else's work or for edit warring: instead, provide a reason that is based on policies, guidelines, or common sense. |
|
|
::Nobody here was working in bad faith. Maybe an admin could explain the legitimacy there. ] (]) 20:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::There is nothing wrong with reverting a good faith edit per ]. The idea is that the person adding/changing content has to create a consensus for these changes, and not the person wanting to retain the status quo. --]|] 20:37, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::But it wasn't a single revert, it was 5. ] is not policy. ] is. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 02:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
:::::Yeah, I was replying in more general terms. :) The edit war certainly wasn't appropriate (on both sides), that's why the article is protected now. --]|] 12:12, 9 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:*http://crushable.com/entertainment/canadian-gay-porn-star-murderer-kim-kardashian-233/ |
|
|
:*http://boingboing.net/2012/05/30/gay-porn-actor-in-canada-wante.html |
|
|
:*http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/03/20123229319189131.html |
|
|
:*http://books.google.com/books?id=ncGVPtoZPHcC&q=dramatica#v=snippet&q=dramatica&f=false |
|
|
:All refer to it in present tense as "Encyclopedia Dramatica" as well. ] (]) 19:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''No''' It doesn't seem that difficult. There's an active site known as Encyclopedia Dramatica, so our article called Encyclopedia Dramatica should refer to it in the present tense. Statements specifically about the old version can still use past tense. --] (]) 00:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==== Encyclopedia Dramatica = Cleveland Browns ==== |
|
|
|
|
|
I submit that encyclopediadramatica.se should be officially referred to as Encyclopedia Dramatica in the same way that the 1999 NFL expansion Cleveland Browns are considered as THE Browns, with the Misplaced Pages page (http://en.wikipedia.org/Cleveland_Browns) discussing the entire history of the franchise, not just what happened before the move, and after the expansion franchise. |
|
|
|
|
|
Art Modell owned the Cleveland Browns. He decided to move the team to Baltimore and call them the Ravens. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sherrod DeGrippo owned Encyclopedia Dramatica. She decided to rename the site Oh Internet. |
|
|
|
|
|
New ownership formed a franchise in Cleveland and named them the Browns. That team continued on AS the Browns, and as time advanced, they built their own history AS the Browns. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan Cleary (amongst others) created a mirror site with cached information and titled it Encyclopedia Dramatica. The site (first .ch, then .se) continued on compiling new articles and expanding upon current articles, thusly creating or rather extending the life of the current site KNOWN as Encyclopedia Dramatica. |
|
|
|
|
|
Just as the Baltimore Ravens aren't considered to be the Cleveland Browns in actuality, nor is Oh Internet still Encyclopedia Dramatica. |
|
|
|
|
|
Because the parallels exist, and because all changes concerning the Cleveland Browns franchise is referred to in its entirety pre and post move, this should be the way that the Encyclopedia Dramatica article should be formed, using the Browns as a true precedent. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 17:21, 8 August 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
* Thank you for starting this RfC. If we're going to go with a continuation thing, taking into account the existence of Oh Internet, the best method would be a restructuring of the lede, with the first sentence saying something like, "Encyclopedia Dramatica is a series of wikis, with Encyclopedia Dramatica.com being created on...blah blah talk about split and the existence of ED.se (.ch first though) and Oh Internet". That way, we are covering the split itself and the existence of two wikis. That would be the best way to describe it as a community, if we're going to go that route. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 10:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
*If reliable sources refer to "Encyclopedia Dramatica" in the present tense and/or make specific note of content currently at its present .se address, then that is all that is needed. There's a waning Misplaced Pages clique that still clings to ] and wishes to practice a form of ] to websites that are at odds with the Misplaced Pages's mission. Look at the history of AfDs/DRVs for this article and for the ]. ] (]) 13:34, 9 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:* Do note that I supported the GNAA editor and his improvements to the article and opposed the banning way back when. Please don't think that I am unilaterally one-sided in regards to subjects such as this. I just want the article to be improved properly, without an improper amount of higher POV support of one side over the other just because of the involvement of POV editors from one side. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 08:23, 10 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::*That is unrelated. Seren's bias is shown by his "one-sided" edit war to prevent the link to the current iteration of ED, despite several reliable sources referring to the site, in the present tense, as ED. ] (]) 22:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::* I've already explained above how it should be worded in the present tense, since there's going to be two separate Wikis included in the article (ED.se and Oh Internet). <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 23:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::*OhInternet is not Encyclopedia Dramatica. They wanted to distance themselves, so there is no reason (Other than promotion and spite) why there should be mention of them as a part of a "series" of Encyclopedia Dramaticas. --] (]) 17:35, 22 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Encyclopedia Dramatica still lives, and it lives at .se. For anyone to sugggest otherwise, they should re-aquaint themselves with the facts to stop embarassing themselves. <span style="border:1px solid #333333;padding:1px;">]</span> 17:10, 20 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
{{archivebottom}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Article manipulated again == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== June 2024 == |
|
I discussed this article a couple of years ago with partial success (as the consensus was reached and edits made) and now that I've stumbled upon it again I discover that informations and sources about gore/shock/etc materials being widely used in E.D. have been deleted. The lead now says E.D. is merely a "satirical site". ] (]) 01:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:Can you find and link to the reliable sources that were used back then for such information? <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 02:11, 11 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
::ED is not a shock site, although it does contain some material taken from shock sites.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 04:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
Yes, the .top version is now offline so it didn't last very long. It is unclear why this has happened and the site faces another period of uncertainty. '''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 07:29, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
:::There is the one page I remember that goes with the Offended template that says something like, "if you're offended by this content, go here" and it links to a page with a ton of...well, it's purposefully bad. But, regardless, reliable sources are all that matter. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 05:37, 11 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Thank you. That's just one of many examples where '''E.D. article intends to trick a viewer into seeing gore graphics and adds more shock value''' to that already prsent in materials it uses. I'm bussy this week but yes, the article definitely needs rewriting with more sources. Of course I can't do anything against the will of E.A. enthusiasts who have been patroling this article for years. I invite everyone with good sorces to this topic. Please hurry, this talkpage might get zealously archieved ] (]) 16:40, 13 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::ED (what the hell is "E.A." ?) is not a shock site, and will not be characterized as such; "go find sources" is not going to support a factually incorrect assertion. ] (]) 17:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:It's back, and according to the Dramatica forum, "] suspended the domain." So off we go with a new domain, with .top holding the record for the shortest tenure at less than a month.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 18:02, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
:This IP editor's ''if A then B'' logic conclusions are a bit...poor. ED is an encyclopedic compendium many many things, some of which are articles on shock sites; that does not make ED itself a "shock site", any more than the Misplaced Pages hosting pornstar bios makes this a porn bio website. lemonparty is a shock site. Eel Girl is a shock site. efukt.com is a compendium of only shock images and videos. ED is not. ] (]) 11:12, 11 August 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::Re . ED currently has two domains, edramatica.com which was registered on 9 June 2024, and dramatica.wtf which was registered on 13 May 2024 and is also being used for the forums. Since edramatica.com seems to be the main address and dramatica.wtf is a mirror, the article should give edramatica.com as the address per ].--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 10:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
== Okay? == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:::Re : edramatica.com is down at the moment, but it is unclear whether this is a temporary blip or something more serious.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 15:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
Well, that's just unhelpful. The RfC wasn't ever actually closed. What now? <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 18:03, 7 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::::I'm an ED regular, and I saw it go down live. When it went down, edramatica.com was replaced with a page that said, "So Don't Do That Then... (This domain has been terminated for abuse)", so I think it's safe to believe that edramatica.com has been suspended by EasyDNS. ] (]) 17:23, 17 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Thanks, there have been persistent claims in the past few weeks that domain registrars are unhappy with some of the content on ED. Freedom of speech is one thing, deliberate harassment and defamation of living people is another. Since this is all part of the fun (cough, cough) at ED, it leaves them with the difficult task of finding a new domain and web host.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 18:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
*And thanks to the wonders of the ], we can see the termination message . It does indeed say "So Don't Do That Then... (This domain has been terminated for abuse)" as a message from ], complete with a dead skeleton pirate. At this rate ED will end up as a ] only, because no domain will have them.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 18:18, 17 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
*:The forums at also seem to be down, as all I get is an error message saying "Page could not be loaded". (On other devices I tried, the website won't even load at all and just says "DNS_PROBE_FINISHED_NXDOMAIN") ] (]) 22:37, 17 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:They are now on encyclopediadramatica.gay, which was registered with ] on 17 June 2024. So let's see how long this lasts, they have had three new domains in little over a month.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 07:01, 18 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::That might not be the wisest choice, per the ] section of the ] article. I don't know, we'll just have to wait and see how long this one will last for. ] (]) 11:57, 18 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::OT, but i'm surprised to see ED able to registed the .gay domain at all. ] (]) 11:20, 26 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::The .gay website now redirects to edramatica.com, which is working again. ] (]) 22:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
===.win domain=== |
|
:Pretty clear that the sources provided in that discussion above show ED.se in the present tense...not a mirror, not a fork, or any of that...and the consensus of participants supported that notion. So I think where we're at on this matter is settled. ] (]) 19:22, 7 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Re : It's true that the site is up and running at .win, but it is also up and running at .gay at the time of writing. This leads to a problem with ] as usually only one URL is given.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 07:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
::Not at all. You have to consider several facts. 1) The IPs are clearly random ED.se members, potentially linked here on purpose, perhaps not. 2) Zaiger is an admin (essentially) on ED.se and Tuxlie is a member on ED.se, so their positions are rather involved. 3) The only other people involved in this discussion are Enric Naval, Ianmacm, Conti, BDD, you and me. Of them, Enric and Conti don't seem to have advanced a position for either side. Ianmacm is on your side (sorta, though he could be more clear). And BDD wants something that's more in line with what i'm thinking. So, i'm not seeing a consensus. |
|
|
|
:.gay is the current official domain and hosts both the Encyclopedia Dramatica Forums and the wiki. .win is an unauthorized copy of the site that was made by a disgruntled former wiki sysop. The .win site doesn't even have a forum because the guy who runs it never even had a copy of the forum database (although he tried to beg the owner of .gay for the database). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:No one of any importance from .online or any of the previous domains is using .win, they are all on .gay. ] (]) 00:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
::Do remember though, at this point, i'm not advocating for a past tense version, I just think this needs to be done properly, without over emphasizing ED.se when it hasn't gotten much coverage at all. I'm still advocating for the series of wikis thing though, since that would more fit the whole community thing that ED.se members keep stating. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 20:04, 7 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:: Yeah, it's pretty clear. I'm with Tarc on this one - ] <sup>]</sup> 20:15, 7 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Can you explain then exactly how there is a consensus? <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 20:46, 7 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Give it up, you are embarrassing yourself. You are obviously the only one who wants it past tense, and nobody wants a "series of wikis". OhInternet is not notable. There were a couple of articles mentioning them in the very beginning, but until then they have steadily declined into obscurity. It is obvious to everyone that the only reason you are keeping this alive is to try to grasp onto some feeling of control, or having something to hold over ED's "head". It's time to let go. --] (]) 05:38, 8 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::You are completely ignoring what BDD said above, where the original ED parts should be past tense. And, i'm sorry, but ED.se is ''less notable'' than Oh Internet. Remember that the Daily Dot only counts as one source, no matter how many articles they write about ED.se. Everything else is just trivial mentions. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 08:20, 8 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::I find it highly amusing for an ] adherent to be using the "trivial mentions" argument, seeing how when one likes an article, those "trivial mentions" morph into "significant coverage in reliable sources. It is a demonstrable falsehood that Oh Internet more notable; ED is the one that still gets regular Reliable Source coverage, while OI gets...nothing. ] (]) 16:41, 8 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::But what exactly is the "regular coverage", a sentence? That is trivial. And don't compare me to other ARS members, please, without actually looking at how I source things. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 18:39, 8 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::I see sporadic, but recurring coverage mentioning or addressing ED as a "current" site. I have not seen coverage of it as a "former" site. If it's going on the record that ED is deceased/retired, it would be nice to have citations for that condition. If OI is significantly more notable than ED.se, it shouldn't be hard to find citations of better quality than those offered for ED.se. --] (]) 23:31, 9 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::There are multiple ways to respond to that. Like how ED.se is also calling itself Encyclopedia Dramatica, so it is pretty much impossible to determine if, when news are using the name Encyclopedia Dramatica, they are referring to ED.se as a continuation of ED or just using ED as the name of ED.se. And there were already sources about it being gone, like and . These sources even say that Oh Internet is the successor. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::The main pages of .gay and .win are different, so they are not a complete mirror. Also, .win does not have the forums which are only on .gay. So it does look like .win is an unofficial mirror and not endorsed by the people at .gay.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 07:12, 21 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
::::::But I understand that, since there's two sites in question (Oh Internet and ED.se), the article should be as clear as possible. And multiple ED users have noted on this talk page over the years that ED is about the community and not a specific site. Which is why I proposed having the article discuss them all as a series of related wikis. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 00:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
: Those are 'very interesting' one sided comments by both editors, hmmm, but above statement makes no sense if some ver is accepted or not... .win has more articles, also .win has more quality videos... ] (]) 16:33, 21 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
:::::::What, like ]? Or the dozens of sources from ~2002 that stated definitively that Iraq possessed WMDs? Sometimes a source, even a reliable one, reports something that happened in-the-moment that latter turned out to be inaccurate. It is quite safe to say that the reports of OI being ED's successor have now proven to be inaccurate. You're simply not going to win this, no matter how long you drag it out. ] (]) 01:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::Addressing just one sentence of my response, indeed the least relevant sentence to the point I was making, doesn't really give you a good argument to go on. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 01:53, 10 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::I'm not going to get drawn into an argument over which is the better or more official version, but they are not serving exactly the same content and .win does not have the forum pages.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 16:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
:::::::::As it begins to get tedious to see you say the same things over and over and over, we're left with little choice but to pick out the funnier bits. Reliable sources describe the website at encyclopediadramatica.se as "Encyclopedia Dramatica". Not a fork, not a mirror, not a rogue. Sources do not seem to make much mention of OI at all; if you can find some, feel free to un-redirect ]. As we're covering no new ground lately, and the RfC didn't go your way, IMO there's nothing else to discuss. ] (]) 02:03, 10 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::Okay, let's try this. I've already stated before that neither site has enough notability to have a separate article. Since you're so sure that ED.se is more notable, then show me the sources that discuss it in significant terms. Sources other than the Daily Dot and sources that are actually talking about the site and not just mentioning it offhand. The closest you have is the one Ars Technica article and that's barely more than a mention. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 02:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::Oh, and the RfC was never closed, so it didn't go '''any''' way. But you can pretend to yourself whatever you want. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 02:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::The sourcing issue has been discussed to death above. That you do not accept those sources is not something many here are terribly concerned with any longer. The unofficial RfC is moot. ] (]) 17:34, 10 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::So, basically, you don't have the sources and you're trying to divert the issue. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 01:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:It would seem that .win is down for the count, leaving edramatica.com as the sole host of the property. The circle of life continues... ''']'''<sub> (]•])</sub> 16:02, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
::::::::::::Nothing like a bunch of no-life Wiki editors arguing over relevance. . The collective community known as ED has followed the "mirror" site and Ohinternet has faded into obscurity. Encyclopedia Dramatica is an idea, and ED.se IS Encyclopedia Dramatica. Ohinternet is really just a footnote in this article, as it is simply a branch in ED's history. Any normal person could see that, but I think SilverSeren has an article on ED or something. It makes me lol ] (]) 02:17, 11 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::It's hard to keep up with this, but at the time of writing, .gay is completely offline, while .win has a page saying "It's over - for now... Due to reasons that shall not be disclosed I will not be able to run encyclopediadramatica.win anymore - at least all on my own." This means that edramatica.com is the only working version at the moment, and thankfully we no longer have to listen to arguments about whether .win or .gay is the better version, because both of them are unavailable now.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 16:15, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
:::::::::::::You just made my point for me. ED is the community, so this article should treat it as such, noting the separate websites in that regard. Therefore, it is a series of separate wikis, as, no matter how much you don't want to admit it, some of the community did go to Oh Internet, making that a part of the ED community just as much. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 02:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:::{{Reply|ianmacm}} I'm beginning to get concerned about the quality of the article, as the list of domains & owners is becoming too unwieldy for the infobox. We should probably find a way to truncate it. ''']'''<sub> (]•])</sub> 17:22, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
::::::::::::::Doesn't work that way. ED is a website currently hosted at the .se address. Period, full stop. Apart from a common point in history, OI is irrelevant to ED. There is nothing you are going to gain by further saying "no no no" and repeating the same thing you said the day before, or the day before that, or a week ago. You can't edit-war your way into your preferred version, and you are just about a lone voice pushing this minority POV. So what's the next step? ] (]) 03:38, 11 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::::Agreed, I'm not sure that the infobox needs to list all of the domains that are now defunct.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 17:41, 27 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
:::::::::::::::Probably Dispute Resolution, considering everyone but you (the but you is debatable) has a significant link to ED.se and probably shouldn't be involved in this page at all. And I feel like you're just here because you enjoy being of the opposite side of a discussion than me, full stop. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 03:52, 11 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
:I just closed the RfC, see above. ]<span style="background-color:white; color:#808080;">&</span>] 05:52, 17 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== no link? == |
|
== encyclopediadramatica.se at wikinews == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
why is there no link? ] (]) 17:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
please add this to the ever growing list of sources that refer to encyclopediadramatica.se in the present tense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:There have been so many ups and downs in 2024 that it is hard to keep track of them all. However, the article is correct that edramatica.com is currently the only one that is online. There is also a problem with ] due to unsuitable material on the main page (harassment, ] etc).--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 17:58, 19 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
*https://en.wikinews.org/FanFiction.Net_adult_content_purge_felt_across_fandom_two_weeks_on |
|
|
|
::I'm not sure why the user keeps deleting this as it answered the question and it's useful for other editors who might ask the same question. ] (]) 23:01, 19 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::as of 12/20/24, edramatica.com is down with the "timed out" error, awaiting further information. ] (]) 06:51, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::IsItDownRightNow says that it has been down for over a week. This means that at the time of writing, the site is not online at all. This isn't a major panic, as ED has been offline for weeks in the past and returned. Watch this space.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 08:23, 20 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Are you checking some other ED mirror? I'm taking about edramatica.com, which was back on the same day it got down, which was 12/20/24. ] (]) 18:43, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::I couldn't access edramatica.com yesterday (20 December), but it is back online today. IsItDownRightNow agrees and says "Last down: 1 day 10 hours ago.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 20:42, 21 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== ED Downtime == |
|
that list now includes, among others,: |
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
edramatica.com is down again. |
|
* |
|
|
|
(12/23/24) ] (]) 06:49, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:edramatica.com is back up. (12/23/24) ] (]) 09:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::I'm relaxed about this, as ED's hosting is famously unreliable. It has been offline for days or weeks in the past.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 12:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
] (]) 22:29, 12 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:::Sorry for the long delay, edramatica.com was back up the next day. ] (]) 09:06, 28 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
:Present tense is not an issue at the moment. Besides, as I stated above, Encyclopedia Dramatica is the name ED.se chose for itself, so it's impossible to differentiate between what meaning the media has for the name unless they specifically explain it. Also, Wikinews is not a reliable source. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 06:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC) |
|
Yes, the .top version is now offline so it didn't last very long. It is unclear why this has happened and the site faces another period of uncertainty. ♦IanMacM♦ 07:29, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
view · edit Frequently asked questions
.svg){kind=icon}
