Wikipedia talk:Recent changes article requests
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Volunteering for Work?
If I don't get any objections here or on my Talkpage, then I will take over the incredibly dull job of ensuring that there are no filled articles on this page i.e. hunt for new red links across Wikipedia. Gormenghastly 11:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- No objections but I am worried that some of the entries that do appear are on topics that shouldn't have an article. For instance, there is no encyclopedia article to write about petulance, neatness, tidyness, mediocrity or pomposity (I've removed two). These would be dictionary definitions and should be redirected to wikitionary. Moreover we don't want articles being created on Coitus à unda because that would content should just go in Coitus. We don't want an article on Pain during intercourse because it's an awful title and, again, this should be added to existing articles. Many other examples have me scratching my head: Boot licking? Nutshell? Wikipedia:The motivation of Wikipedia contributors ? This is just going to lead to awful new articles. The list needs to be thoroughly reexamined. Pascal.Tesson 23:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- Think of the oddball entries as easter eggs. The intent of the list is to stimulate editors' interest through diversity, by intermixing entries from many different fields of study, and combining the serious with the silly and occasionally completely off-the-wall, whilst at the same time fulfilling its serious purpose of methodically helping editors work their way through the most-wanted and missing topics lists, from which it is (mostly) refilled. -- The Anome (talk) 21:41, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Incidentally, many of the terms of the sort you object to are sourced from external topic-specific glossaries, which clearly do consider these terms to be notable. Many of these can, at the very least, be converted into redirects to articles with non-obvious titles for example, pain during intercourse, one of the titles you objected to, now redirects to dyspareunia. -- The Anome (talk) 11:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- (And, as I realise I failed to mention earlier, there is a notable and documented fetish subculture relating to boot-licking, among both heterosexual and gay kinksters. There are quite a lot of obscure-but-notable sexual topics remaining to be dealt with...) -- The Anome (talk) 19:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Your explanation for terms which are unlikely in a month of sundays to become articles doesn't work for me, The Anome. FWIW I think more care should be taken to edit out the troll-esque suggestions. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Then simply don't create those articles, or edit the template yourself to remove them. However, I believe that the serious vs. silly ratio is more than 95% in favour of serious (and sometimes obscure) articles, and even the silly topics are chosen to be potentially encyclopedic, if offbeat. And at the same time as it generates some modest entertainment, this list is slowly crunching its way through various article creation backlog lists... -- The Anome (talk) 19:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] Now added
All links currently in Wikipedia:Articles requested for more than a year have now been merged into the template list. -- The Anome (talk) 21:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Recently added: interesting nouns beginning with X, Y, and Z, some most-wanted species, and some fashion terms... -- The Anome (talk) 19:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
And a couple of medical terms. -- The Anome (talk) 22:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Blue links
Blue links mean that the articles exist, correct? Because there are quite a few Blue links. --Mbabbitt2003 (talk) 15:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
- Changed out all the blue links from Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Skysmith's list of missing articles. Jeepday (talk) 04:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
