Talk:WikiHow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

why we do we need this project ? Alhoori

Why do who need this project? This project is not a Wikimedia project, and nor shall it ever become one (unlike the vague possibility of wikihowto becoming one). - Estel ^(talk) 19:44, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

• Its information. That's all. --66.218.13.117 03:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

• WIKIHOW IS WAY BETTER THAN WIKIPEDIA. YOU HEARD ME I SAID IT! WIKIPEDIA IS THE ABSOULUTE WORST. WOOKYPEDIA IS BETTTER THAN WIKIPEDIA. WIKIPEDIA IS JUST A COPY OF A LOT OF OTHER WIKI'S. WIKIHOW IS UNIQUE, AND HAS MUCH NICER ADMINISTRATORS LIKE: SONDRA C., KNOWITSOME, FLICKETY, LILLIAN A., THE CREATOR JACK H., WEBMASTER JOSH HANNAH, HORSES4EVER, TOM VIREN, TRAVIS DEROUIN, HAROLD R. NICOLE WILLSON (ELOCINA) DAVE CROSBY, CEM, JAMES_UK (ALTHOUGH HE'S GONE UNFORTUNATELY), ANDY ZHANG, AXIOM, BEN RUBENSTEIN, BRETT CAPEWELL, NATHAN WONG, JAMES QUIRK, KRYSTLE C., BRIGITTA M. (GONE AS WELL), VERSAGEEK, JOSH H., lUCAS HALBERT AND PASTOR ZACK. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.150.42.233 (talk • contribs).

lol! Wikipedia is the wiki that started it all, it certainly isn't a copy of anything. It's unlikely that wikiHow would exist today if Wikipedia hadn't come first. On behalf of wikiHowians, we're glad you like us. Looking at your edit history, I'm guessing there are a number of Wikipedians that are also happy you prefer editing on wikiHow. --Versageek 03:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia wasn't the first wiki. It's just one of the oldest/most well known. Also with regards to the article- I found the 'how to dodge bullets' link quite informative! (At least it contained some handy hints)

I might frame the above and put it on my wall :) - Estel ^(talk) 23:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Sondra C. and Horses4ever aren't admins TylerJarHead 17:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] move of "censorship" from description to criticisms

Regarding this edit. Were you able to find any sources we can cite showing this as a criticism? While I agree that censorship is certainly valid grounds for criticism, when I refactored this article a few months ago for the purposes of providing citations and improving formatting, I moved the subject from criticisms to the descriptive section as I was unable to find any attributable sources to cite showing criticism of this nature.

--Versageek 22:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC) I am a wikiHow admin/editor, I have a close relationship to the site which is the subject of this article. My objective in editing this page is to make it a properly formatted, well referenced, Wikipedia article. In addition, I periodically update the site statistics and milestones from the given references.

Cited the talk page:

so in this fascist thought regime, how can one politely protest a deletion, or is it basically "screw you, our opintion are final"? Oh wait, don't bother to reply to this one ... or better yet, ban the dissenters.
--134.84.134.46 4 May 2006
I agree with 134.84.134.46 - wiki means anyone should be able to contribute anything, not only what a small, centralised committee would approve. Why not conduct a randomized poll of wikihow users and contributors what they think of the deletion policies?
--130.91.156.225 10 July 2006

Hope this helps. CA387 03:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

LOL! - The one domain I had excluded from my search when looking for criticisms of wikiHow was wikiHow.com itself. It seemed too much like navel gazing. Thanks for adding the cite. :) -- Versageek 04:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)