Talk:Citizendium

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

This Citizendium related article has been awarded GOLD status for quality. Please keep this in mind when editing the article. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Goldenbrain.png
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.

Archives for this talk page: , (new)


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

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

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)

Forum links 404[edit]

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? 37.228.229.180 (talk) 23:50, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
By all means! - David Gerard (talk) 13:12, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

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

See User_talk:Stigmatella_aurantiaca#Citizendium

Why close CZ?[edit]

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)

--109.158.46.231 (talk) 22:32, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Felis silvestris catus[edit]

I suggest to delete this entirely:

* [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Cat&diff=prev&oldid=100011708 Cat] — For four years used the redundant scientific nomenclature for the domesticated cat, ''Felis silvestris catus''. The accepted nomenclature is ''Felis catus'', see for example [http://www.itis.gov/servlet/SingleRpt/SingleRpt?search_topic=TSN&search_value=183798 ITIS taxonomy]. Note that ''silvestris'' is a wildcat ancestor, not domesticated cat. [http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/168536/domestic-cat Encyclopædia Britannica], [http://tolweb.org/Felis_catus/123531 Tree of Life] (TOL), [http://www.eol.org/pages/1037781 Encyclopedia of Life] (EOL), and Wikipedia all use ''Felis catus'' for domesticated cat. Has since been corrected.<ref group="RationalWiki">Thanks to us: [http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Citizendium&diff=686898&oldid=686408 RationalWiki edit]; [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Cat&diff=100732551&oldid=100713317 Citizendium correction].</ref> ''Felis silvestris catus'' is not redundant, it is a [[w:trinomen|trinomen]] referring to a ''sub''species. Domestic cats were classified as a species by Linnaeus, but today it is also common to view them as a subspecies of the wildcat. Quoting from [[w:cat|Wikipedia]]: :The domestic cat was first classified as ''Felis catus'' by [[Carl Linnaeus]] in the 10th edition of his ''[[10th edition of Systema Naturae|Systema Naturae]]'' published in 1758.<ref name="MSW3fc" /><ref name="Linaeus1758">{{Cite book|last=Linnaeus |first=Carolus |authorlink=Carl Linnaeus |title=''Systema naturae per regna tria naturae: secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis'' |publisher=Holmiae (Laurentii Salvii) |year=1766 |page=62 |url= http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k99004c/f62.chemindefer |accessdate=2 April 2008 |language=la |volume=1 |edition=12th |origyear=1758}}</ref> Because of modern [[phylogenetics]], domestic cats are usually regarded as another subspecies of the wildcat, ''F. silvestris''.<ref name="MSW3fc" /><ref name="Driscoll" /><ref name="MSW3fs">{{MSW3 Carnivora|pages=536–537|id=14000057|heading=Species ''Felis silvestris''}}</ref> This has resulted in mixed usage of the terms, as the domestic cat can be called by its subspecies name, ''Felis silvestris catus''.<ref name="MSW3fc" /><ref name="Driscoll" /><ref name="MSW3fs" /> Wildcats have also been referred to as various subspecies of ''F. catus'',<ref name="MSW3fs" /> but in 2003, the [[International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature]] fixed the name for wildcats as ''F. silvestris''.<ref name="ICZN">{{Cite journal |title=Opinion 2027 |journal=Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature |volume=60 |publisher=[[International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature]] (ICZN) |year=2003 |url= http://www.nhm.ac.uk/hosted_sites/iczn/BZNMar2003opinions.htm |archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20110609014212/http://www.nhm.ac.uk/hosted_sites/iczn/BZNMar2003opinions.htm |archivedate= 9 June 2011 }}</ref> The most common name in use for the domestic cat remains ''F. catus'', following a [[Convention (norm)|convention]] for domesticated animals of using the earliest (the senior) [[Synonym (taxonomy)|synonym]] proposed.<ref name="ICZN" /> Sometimes, the domestic cat has been called ''Felis domesticus''<ref name="MacDonald" /> or ''Felis domestica'',<ref name="MSW3fc" /> as proposed by German naturalist [[Johann Christian Polycarp Erxleben|J. C. P. Erxleben]] in 1777, but these are not valid taxonomic names and have been used only rarely in scientific literature,<ref name="Baron" /> because Linnaeus's binomial takes precedence.<ref name="Vella">{{Cite book |title=Robinson's Genetics for Cat Breeders and Veterinarians |edition=4th |publisher=Butterworth-Heinemann |isbn=0-7506-4069-3 |last=Vella |first=Carolyn M. |author2=Shelton, Lorraine M. |author3=McGonagle, John J. |author4= Stanglein, Terry W. |year=1999 |page=3}}</ref> A population of [[Transcaucasus|Transcaucasian]] black feral cats was once classified as ''Felis daemon''<small> ([[Konstantin Alekseevich Satunin|Satunin]] 1904)</small> but now this population is considered to be a part of domestic cat.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://caucasian-large-mammalian.narod.ru/ |title=Catalogue of the Specimens of Caucasian Large Mammalian Fauna in the Collection of The National Museum of Georgia |publisher=Caucasian-large-mammalian.narod.ru |accessdate=4 July 2013}}</ref> <div style="font-size:xx-small"> <references group="RationalWiki" /> <references /> </div>

-- Ivan (talk) 12:11, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Larry Sanger article on Wikipedia in The Sunday Times[edit]

Anyone care to add a reference to the article in The ST (though a paywall may be in operation)?

Key flags in the article - LS complains about Wikipedia's 'liberal/left wing bias' (though an element of sour grapes may apply) and is home-schooling his sons. Anna Livia (talk) 12:56, 2 August 2021 (UTC)