Misplaced Pages

Talk:Essjay controversy: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Latest revision as of 07:30, 18 November 2024 edit Zanahary (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers6,866 edits Reverted 1 edit by 147.236.231.255 (talk)Tags: Twinkle Undo 
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 07:30, 18 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Essjay controversy article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
Good articleEssjay controversy has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 7, 2007Articles for deletionNo consensus
March 8, 2007Articles for deletionSpeedily kept
March 12, 2007Articles for deletionSpeedily kept
April 11, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
May 6, 2007Articles for deletionKept
September 4, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 1, 2007Good article nomineeListed
September 24, 2008Articles for deletionSpeedily kept
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 7, 2007.
Current status: Good article
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconMisplaced Pages Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Misplaced Pages, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Misplaced Pages.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Essjay controversy was copied or moved into List of Misplaced Pages controversies with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Media mentionThis article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Instances of the name "Wikia" in the article

This can't be right, surely. The article repeatedly refers to "Wikia". Wikia is another entity entirely – now called Fandom. I checked and the text which states "Wikia" has been there a long time. Was Misplaced Pages previously referred to as Misplaced Pages or is this just a mistake that hasn't been caught in years? Hoping someone else can advise on this matter. Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 16:28, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I should do research before saying things :) Turns out that our Mr Wales co-founded the Wikia website. Maybe this article should provide more context on that, though, for those who are unaware? DesertPipeline (talk) 16:36, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

No need ... just click through the link at the first mention of Wikia in the article. Jibal (talk) 20:22, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Discussion about linking to userpage...

Can be found here Oiyarbepsy (talk) 19:45, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

See also section

@Crazynas, what is unclear? They're both clearly labeled as key early Internet moments of online communities figuring out how to grapple with misrepresented anonymous identity. czar 15:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

@Czar: I do see, I just wasn't sure why a cartoon that came out 12 years before the controversy could be relevant. But I understand the connnection as far as the way Essjay presented himself, I'm going to reinstate it without your description (since we don't unusually put descriptions after See Also links do we? Crazynas 19:01, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks and yep: "Editors should provide a brief annotation when a link's relevance is not immediately apparent, when the meaning of the term may not be generally known, or when the term is ambiguous." czar 19:16, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

wait he from ky?

think hes from louisville BoulevardBowl27 (talk) 15:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Does his photo need to be here?

This article is about nothing more than a super humiliating incident. No encyclopedic value is really lost with the removal of this tiny, poor-quality selfie from 2007. Does anyone object to its removal? ꧁Zanahary21:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Categories: