This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Marketing & AdvertisingWikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingTemplate:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingMarketing & Advertising articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PortugalWikipedia:WikiProject PortugalTemplate:WikiProject PortugalPortugal articles
Find correct name
The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere.
The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo.
Template:Regions of Portugal: statistical (NUTS3) subregions and intercommunal entities are confused; they are not the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be listed explicitly and not assume they are only intermunicipal entities (which accessorily are not statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this box).
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I have lists of sources at Talk:Net neutrality and on the discussion page for the ad image itself. I think that this article should be the centralized repository for the list of sources discussing this ad. If anyone finds more please post them.
The origin of this ad as a pop culture phenomenon happened from 26-30 October. Lots of sources recognize that Ro Khanna was the first to post this ad in the context of a discussion about net neutrality. The next media to pick it up was Reddit. What is on reddit one day gets to Boing Boing the next, with that blog leading a lot of tech publications. From Boing Boing / Corey it went to Quartz, then in Tim's Twitter he cites the Quartz article. From here everyone started discussing the ad and various journalists began writing articles based on sources several degrees removed from the original conversation.
Normally on Wikipedia community discussion forums like reddit and self-published sources like Twitter posts are not reliable to cite. In this case I think they are reliable in the sense that I cited them. I am not pulling content from these sources, and instead, they are useful to cite in the context of demonstrating the fact of a conversation in the case of reddit and the fact of expert statements on which further publication is based in the cases of Ro and Tim.
Wikipedia is not the place to do research and publish new thought on these things. There is not much research here - I have these 26-30 October publications with timestamps and I have not identified anything earlier - but it is original research for me to claim that later publications all originated from these.
I thought I would post here to clear my head and see if anyone had other thoughts about whether or how this article could include this information. Blue Rasberry (talk) 05:59, 15 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
