Wikipedia talk:Press releases/March 2005

message: I have a fat directory of US newspapers here, and we can plunder the press log from september's release. 
Also needed: mailing lists, newsgroups, cool websites.  +sj +
SOMEONE VANDALIZED THE PAGE, FIX IMMEDIATELY
:It was fixed 2.5 hours before the above line was added. I'd be happy to delete the above line and this reply. David Brooks 22:22, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: How to distribute this release

message: Is it too late to restructure this press release? A standard press release puts the "news" in the first sentence. This has a long expository, with terms that general readers would not understand, like subject-area portals. Press releases should not confuse or confound. Fuzheado | Talk 06:53, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "putting the 'confound' back into 'press release'"...   No, not too late at all.  We still have a few days to hammer it out.  It will mainly be released in English, in any case.  +sj + 11:48, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

text: I think the 500,000 number is enough on its own and the short length of the press relase is the right size. We could put up some numbers of Encarta or Britannica as comparison, but I would caution against it.. Fuzheado | Talk 00:33, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments on content

message: Do the developers have some way of determining which article is #500,000?  I tried loading the "Statistics" and "New Pages" times at the same time, and found that there were 500,193 articles, and that the 194th most recently-created article was Battle of Bean's Station.  Hopefully, there's some more scientific way of doing this?
Anyway, it seems to be copyvio, so I've removed it for now, and I'm contacting the user who posted it.
Thanks, -- Creidieki 22:47, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Determining article #500,000 

message: 5,000 editors in the past month? Where is that from? 119 07:24, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 5,000 editors in the past month?

message: Would it be appropriate to post notices on Peer review, Village Pump, and/or the mailing lists saying that Involuntary settlements in the Soviet Union is about to become very well-known, and it might be helpful for us if it were more complete?  I'm not sure quite where that sort of post would be appropriate, or whether some people might object to "inflating" the article.  Mainstream news sources might not understand the difference between the software's definition of "article" and the Encyclopaedia Britannica's.  -- Creidieki 12:28, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me, really. Some people might object, but the result does seem to have more pros than cons.-- Kizor 16:06, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Publicizing the article in-house 

message: The press release seems to have a definitive pro-Wikipedia bias to me. We should work to make it more NPOV. -- Kizor 16:06, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why does something not in the main article space have to conform to the NPOV policy? — Matt Crypto 16:32, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Frankly, because it was fun to say. 'Nyuk nyuk nyuk' is a reference to the Three Stooges comedy group.-- Kizor 16:45, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nyuk nyuk nyuk 

message: "if printed double-sided would form a stack about 66 feet or over 6 stories tall". Printed on what?--Jerryseinfeld 18:45, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Publishes 500,000th English Article 

message: Is there any sysops to adding the interwiki link for this article?
I got the link for Chinese Wiki in below:
zh-cn:Wikipedia:新闻稿/2005年3月 (简)
zh-tw:Wikipedia:新闻稿/2005年3月 (繁)
thanks~~ :) Shinjiman 16:26, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interwiki