Talk:The WELL

message: I'm considering adding more information to the page regarding other virtual communities. It would be helpful to have a list of virtual communities so people can have a better understanding. Also, I've noticed confusion around virtual communities and social networking sites. Pointing out the similarities and differences of both would help cut down on confusion. Below are a few sources I plan on using. Open to suggestions as well!
https://www.techopedia.com/definition/15504/virtual-community
https://www.socialmediatoday.com/content/social-network-vs-online-community-what-difference
http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/articles/pages/6632/EXAMPLES-OF-VIRTUAL-COMMUNITIES.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kehinton1 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional information

message: *Howard Rheingold
*Stewart Brand
*Jon Carroll
*Clifford Stoll
*John Markoff
*Katie Hafner
*Mike Godwin
*Kevin Kelly
*User:Jpgordon
well done
(This is just a placeholder - I'll try to work up some content regarding the WELL's history and impact later). --Calton | Talk 06:11, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Some WELL members:

message: The following paragraph is completely unreadable and needs to be reformatted and rewritten.  I dug in and tried, and couldn't make heads or tails out of some parts.  I tried to reformat it as a sub-bulletted list, but gave up.
Roy Ascott and Carl Eugene Loeffler, Guest Editors, Connectivity: Art and Interactive Telecommunications, Leonardo 24:2, 1991. Includes documentation of early artworks on ArtCom Electronic Network, a WELL Conference and archive started in 1986 by Carl Loeffler and Fred Truck. Artworks created or published on ACEN on the WELL included John Cage, (The First Meeting of the Satie Society) Judy Malloy, (Uncle Roger, Bad Information, Thirty Minutes in the Late Afternoon) Jim Rosenberg,(Diagram Series) and Sonya Rapoport. (Digital Mudra Online) Connectivity: Art and Interactive Telecomunications includes papers about art on the WELL by Ron Buck, ("Poetry Online") Carl Loeffler, ("Modem Dialing Out") Anna Couey, ("Art Works as Organic Communications Systems") Roger Malina, ("FineArt Forum and F.A.S.T.: Experiments in Electronic Publishing in the Arts) Gil MinaMora, ("Hidden Bearers: An Exquisite Corpse Online") and Judy Malloy, ("Uncle Roger, an Online Narrabase"). 
MichaelSHoffman (talk) 03:06, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no idea what that paragraph is about. I suggest deleting it. If the original editors think it's important they can put back a readable version. Alanf777 (talk) 17:46, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleted. Feel free to rewrite it. Alanf777 (talk) 04:57, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreadable paragraph needs rewrite 

message: The article currently fails to explain whether the site is still regularly updated; the most recent entries appear to be from several years ago, and the most recent activity mentioned in the article is from 2007. Is the site still regularly updated? Does it have an active user base? -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 08:17, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there is an active user base.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:59, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The WELL is a paid-subscriber bulletin board -- and still very active, I  can attest -- that has little publicly accessible free content. The article also notes that the WELL was sold by Salon Media Group this year, so I don't understand where you got the notion that it's been inactive for the last five years. --Calton | Talk 11:02, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead? 

message: The article needs updating and clean-up, and quite a lot of it needs citations. I'm a well subscriber, but have no involvement in the ownership: nor am I a conference host. Should I make a formal "conflict of interest" declaration before doing any edits? (If there are no objections within a few days I'll go ahead.) Alanf777 (talk) 20:32, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I would not think such a declaration should be needed. I suspect that editors of the Facebook article, LinkedIn article etc, are likely to be "members" and I doubt anyone thinks that requires a disclosure. I realize the Well is not exactly like those places (and proud of it), but I don't think a mere member would have to declare a COI. It might be good to note you are a member, but that is done. While I'm at it, so am I.--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:42, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems unanimous. Alanf777 (talk) 16:24, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

text: I changed one, and it looks ungrammatical, unless it's bolded/italicised The Well or The Well  -- so I think I'll leave it alone for now, or apply it judiciously. Alanf777 (talk) 19:05, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Wherever the corporation is talked about, I used The WELL. In other cases I just italicised WELL -- leaving some the's alone. Looks OK to me now. Alanf777 (talk) 05:00, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

text: I shuffled the Gail Williams para into chronological order (and added community manager from her wiki article) . I'm not sure if this merits a para in history. Alanf777 (talk) 19:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Planned Edits 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The WELL. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070310191401/http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,18992,00.html to http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,18992,00.html
*Added  tag to http://www.socialchemy.com/smalltown93.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:31, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Adding clarification and examples about virtual communities and social networking sites is a great idea. I'm not sure what the differences are. 
I'm also curious about the lack of sources. In the first few paragraphs, I noticed at least 5 instances of unsubstantiated claims: line about Gail Ann Williams, being acquired by Salon, Earl Crabbs death, the connection between the founders of the EFF, etc. Is there a reason that you decided not to attack this area? It might be too big for the scope of the class? 
Jakes27s (talk) 23:47, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I am revising the WELL page. Since you posted four years ago, Wikipedia has added a lengthy and very detailed page on virtual communities. The virtual community section here does not contain a lot of WELL-specific content, and I propose deleting it due to lack of relevance to this entry. I have already added an internal link to the proper Wikipedia page. Please respond if you want to revise this section instead to make it more WELL-specific. Oldgirlpop (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lisa's Peer Review 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:37, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I note that the question of whether this was fair use of the logo was resolved on the Wikimedia Commons page. Oldgirlpop (talk) 18:41, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: I've done some research and am able to, at minimum, improve the quantity and sourcing of this page. I also propose to reorganize some of the existing material to make it easier to find specific facts about The WELL, and to add a section called "Cultural Impact" to collect the various projects inspired by or founded by WELL members. On the other hand, the entire student-written section on virtual communities is not specific to The WELL and duplicates a more exhaustive existing Wikipedia page on the topic. In my opinion, it should simply be deleted and/or moved to the Virtual Communities page. I've done minor Wikipedia edits before, but this would be a bigger cleanup, so I've created an account and am owning it. Oldgirlpop (talk) 19:54, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: My COI statement: I am one of the 3,000 members of the WELL. I do not have a financial interest in the WELL. Oldgirlpop (talk) 18:42, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

text: COI statement: I am also a member/user of the WELL and a former staff member (1991-1994). I do not have a financial interest in The WELL. MatisseEnzer (talk) 21:56, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

text: I have reorganized, edited and sourced these sections: Introduction, History, Technology and Structure, Policy and Governance, Cultural Impact, In the News and Publications about The WELL. For sure they could use an editor's eye, especially to be sure everything got cited that needed to be and that transitions make sense where I moved things around. I have not yet deleted the Virtual Community section; giving the previous editor a chance to respond. Oldgirlpop (talk) 02:04, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find qualified sources for Christian Ruzich and Daryl-Lynn Johnson's tenure as co-general managers; Ruzich doesn't list the WELL on his LinkedIn page, even. I have deleted them for now; will add them back in if we can source them. Oldgirlpop (talk) 02:19, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

text: I added Howard Rheingold's ID to the caption of the office party photo; please ID anybody else who is mentioned in the article if you can, thanks! I will take another look at Rheingold's book and see if we can use it for the paragraph about how the conferences are structured; it's about the only one remaining that only uses The WELL's website as a source. Oldgirlpop (talk) 01:54, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improving the quality of this page 

message: This article massively over-states the importance of an obscure internet community few people know or care about. It's clear the entire article was written by members of that community and zealously pruned of any criticism or unbiased perspective. 5.67.75.180 (talk) 13:24, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The article fairly represents the published material about WELL which is quite positive. If you know about negative accounts published in WP:Reliable sources then please point to them. Binksternet (talk) 14:22, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fawning hagiography