Changes

Seriously, the nonencyclopedic entries in this article are getting a little ridiculous.  If the asking of unanswerable questions doesn't qualify as "gossip" then I don't know what does. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 02:11, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Seriously, the nonencyclopedic entries in this article are getting a little ridiculous.  If the asking of unanswerable questions doesn't qualify as "gossip" then I don't know what does. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 02:11, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

: Good comment.  The "point 3" has been revised so that it does not ask any questions now.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:36, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:: Good comment.  The "point 3" has been revised so that it does not ask any questions now.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:36, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

: Regarding the factual points only: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Statistics Special:Statistics] is very much available on Wikipedia, that part is explicitly wrong.  And while it's true that the per-article statistics have been disabled on Wikipedia proper for a while, the data is currently available [http://tools.wikimedia.de/~leon/stats/wikicharts/index.php?ns=articles&limit=100&wiki=enwiki here], allowing one to draw their own conclusions about the extent to which Wikipedia is seeking traffic with its sex-related entries.  (Sex is #13 most popular, followed by other sex-related entries currently at #36, #41, #42, #54, #70, and #94).

: Regarding the factual points only: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Statistics Special:Statistics] is very much available on Wikipedia, that part is explicitly wrong.  And while it's true that the per-article statistics have been disabled on Wikipedia proper for a while, the data is currently available [http://tools.wikimedia.de/~leon/stats/wikicharts/index.php?ns=articles&limit=100&wiki=enwiki here], allowing one to draw their own conclusions about the extent to which Wikipedia is seeking traffic with its sex-related entries.  (Sex is #13 most popular, followed by other sex-related entries currently at #36, #41, #42, #54, #70, and #94).

: The sex-related entries rank higher than that on the most recently available data.  Point #3 has been updated to reflect your comments, though I note that nothing was "explicitly wrong" about its earlier version.  The way that Wikipedia reports this data is not where wiki users would expect to see it, and the Wikipedia reports may be less accurate and timely than the reports on Conservapedia.  An entry on John Gotti or an obscure "George Washington" (not the president) ranking so high?  Seems implausible, making me wonder if the file is editing as a joke.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:36, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

:: The sex-related entries rank higher than that on the most recently available data.  Point #3 has been updated to reflect your comments, though I note that nothing was "explicitly wrong" about its earlier version.  The way that Wikipedia reports this data is not where wiki users would expect to see it, and the Wikipedia reports may be less accurate and timely than the reports on Conservapedia.  An entry on John Gotti or an obscure "George Washington" (not the president) ranking so high?  Seems implausible, making me wonder if the file is editing as a joke.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:36, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

: Also, I believe Special:Popularpages has been removed from newer versions of MediaWiki for development reasons, and when Conservapedia upgrades to a newer version of MediaWiki, Special:Popularpages will no longer be available here either. [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:TopTenPages] --[[User:Interiot|Interiot]] 02:28, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

: Also, I believe Special:Popularpages has been removed from newer versions of MediaWiki for development reasons, and when Conservapedia upgrades to a newer version of MediaWiki, Special:Popularpages will no longer be available here either. [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:TopTenPages] --[[User:Interiot|Interiot]] 02:28, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Good thing this is not a mainpage "item of interest" accusing Wikipedia of attracting young children to the site with sexual conduct and then trying to hide the fact! oh wait but it is and it does! --[[User:Cgday|Cgday]] 05:45, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Good thing this is not a mainpage "item of interest" accusing Wikipedia of attracting young children to the site with sexual conduct and then trying to hide the fact! oh wait but it is and it does! --[[User:Cgday|Cgday]] 05:45, 2 April 2007 (EDT)