From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon citizendium.svg

This Citizendium related article has been awarded GOLD status for quality. Please keep this in mind when editing the article.

This article is of MID importance to the wiki.

See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Editorial notes
  • Seems fine
Information icon.svg Cover Story
This article is, among others, randomly included on the Main Page.
Please keep this in mind and be sure that your edits are of the quality that this implies.
Its front-page abstract can be found here and its editnotice here.

This page is automatically archived by Archivist
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>

Note: the current follies are being reported at WIGO CZ and discussed at its talk page.


[edit] Random footnotes

[edit] What law exactly are we expected to presume Citizendium broke?

The article makes some references to some violations of citizendium copyright policy, and then from that fact presupposes some sort of "law" was broken without telling us what law or how it was broken ( accusing others of a crime or civil wrong/tort in a "hit piece" without evidence can get one sued for libel ) Only major flaw in this article I have found.LogicMaster777 (talk) 17:22, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

The details can be found in the citations: keep in mind this is amateur lawyering on behalf of a third party, which isn't a formula for legal rectitude. I don't think there's any direct assertions of breaking the law in the article, just that they aren't big on maintaining their images properly. Reads like a tempest in a teapot to me, and I could personally do without the whole section. Ikanreed (talk) 18:24, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Agreed, this whole section tends to undermine the credibility of the article more than it does to support its general thrust in my opinion. It uses pretty questionable and subjective sources and is basically an opinion presented as fact a la Alex Jones/Fox News.LogicMaster777 (talk) 18:35, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
It's not quite that bad, either. Citing our own talk page as a source is tacky, though. Ikanreed (talk) 18:39, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Forum links 404

With the death of the forum, a pile of the links are 404, including un-captured ones. Anything in archives? - David Gerard (talk) 11:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

The internet archive has a copy of the forums. Can that be used? (talk) 23:50, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
By all means! - David Gerard (talk) 13:12, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Ongoing discussion on this article by new user concerning acceptable vs unacceptable humor

See User_talk:Stigmatella_aurantiaca#Citizendium

[edit] Why close CZ?

I’m sure people here have many answers. Now CZ has a thread for you:

Why close CZ?

(there's also Has the project failed? for more existential musings)

-- (talk) 22:32, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Personal tools