Talk:Liblogs
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
74.98.218.238 16:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC) Editing for "wordiness" is only going to get the article deleted. It needs substance to it.
- Extra words do not equal substance. Look at these two passages:
- Liblogs was created as a reaction to The Blogging Tories and Progressive Bloggers. It began as a small list of links disseminated on Liberal blogs. In April 2005, a central website was created to aggregate content from member sites. Liblogs remained quite small until the 2006 federal election, when membership numbers swelled.
and
-
- Initially, Liblogs was created as a reaction to The Blogging Tories and Progressive Bloggers. It began as a small list of links that different Liberals included on their blogs, but expanded into a website including aggregation of member blogs in April 2005. Liblogs remained small until the 2006 federal election, when new blogs began joining at a rate of almost 10 each week. By the end of the campaign, Liblogs was a regular Internet source of Liberal information.
- Don't they say the same thing? 125.244.21.242 23:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Not quite. The links weren't "disseminated". Also, it is a bit much to say "quite small". Adding "swelled" takes a lot away from the description. How much did it swell? Doesn't quanitity matter? Generally you would be right. However, the example you give goes too far. I am particularly opposed to all the information you removed in the first sentence. Jason Cherniak 04:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Excellent work! Maybe this is better than either version. I'll insert it:
-
-
-
- Liblogs was created as a reaction to The Blogging Tories and Progressive Bloggers. It began as a small list of links included on Liberal blogs. In April 2005, a central website was created to aggregate content from member sites. During the 2006 federal election, the membership of Liblogs increased significantly.
-
Watchsmart 05:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)