Talk:The Iraq War: A Historiography of Wikipedia Changelogs
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Bluerasberry in topic More Wikipedia art?
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from The Iraq War: A Historiography of Wikipedia Changelogs appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 5 July 2012, and was viewed approximately 4,700 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
More Wikipedia art? edit
I am curious to know how much Wikipedia art exists. What other works are there? If anyone has ideas, share here because perhaps there should be a category for them. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:03, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
- There was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia Art.Smallman12q (talk) 19:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
- Apparently, when you try to do it, Wikipedia editors will nag you to the point of needing a lawyer. http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/leisure/exhibitions/9075274.Trust__trolls_and_trademarks___Artists_suffer_for_artwork_made_on_Wikipedia/ . Also, if we make enough comments, we could publish a book about the comments we make in THIS page, with the title of "An exercise in self referencig: A Historiography of Wikipedia Changelogs in the Wikipedia article "The Irak War: A Historiography of Wikipedia Changelogs"".
- That, I would love to do, ad infinitum, writing comments in Wikipedia articles on books written about comments in Wikipedia articles. Is this comment art or do we need a book on the comment to become art? Notice I did not make changes to this comment while making it: not art!
- Arrgh. After writing the two previous paragraphs, I hit the Submit button and then Wikipedia protested because I wasn't logged in, claiming my IP would be logged for all eternity (brrrr! Eternity!). So, I had an epiphany, went back, copied the comment, logged in and added THIS comment in a third paragraph. Hence: Art! (although undocumented, so subversive art, I guess). --Ciroa (talk) 08:32, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for sharing this source - that is interesting and relevant. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:00, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- Arrgh. After writing the two previous paragraphs, I hit the Submit button and then Wikipedia protested because I wasn't logged in, claiming my IP would be logged for all eternity (brrrr! Eternity!). So, I had an epiphany, went back, copied the comment, logged in and added THIS comment in a third paragraph. Hence: Art! (although undocumented, so subversive art, I guess). --Ciroa (talk) 08:32, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Title edit
The cover seems to say historiography not history. Secretlondon (talk) 22:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
- I changed the article's title to reflect this. The creator on his own page used the word "history" when giving the title of this work. I see that in his flickr account from where the pictures came he uses the title as it is printed on the cover of the books. None of the references seem to give the title of the work in full form. Blue Rasberry (talk) 12:44, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
- Wow. For a guy that writes Raspberry without the "p", that is a proof of attention to detail. So, one is inclined to think: why the absence of "p"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ciroa (talk • contribs) 08:35, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comment but please post personal questions on userpages, which you can access by clicking a person's signature. My userpage says that my real name is Rasberry. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:59, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- Wow. For a guy that writes Raspberry without the "p", that is a proof of attention to detail. So, one is inclined to think: why the absence of "p"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ciroa (talk • contribs) 08:35, 5 July 2012 (UTC)