| Author |
 Topic  |
|
WKPDA
New Member
|
 Posted - 02/17/2008 : 04:42:57 AM
|
Wikipedia, a free, on-line, non-profit encyclopedia needs more collaborative writers for its naturism-related articles. This is one of the top-ten sites on the internet by volume. But before jumping in, please be aware of some the important differences between Wikipedia and a fourm such as this one.
1.) No opinions or point of view, just the facts. (If there's a controversy about something, both sides can be given. But it should be a MAJOR, well-known controversy.) Should you find a blatant, factual error, please feel free to make a correction.
2.) Wikipedia is for the GENERAL PUBLIC. Don't assume anyone knows anything about naturism. (Except, of course, what's already been written above where you start your edit.)
3.) No "how to's" like an instruction manual.
4.) No current "news" like found in a newspaper. (Exception for major world news only on the home page). However, if something is no longer true, this can be edited at once.
5.) Wikipedia uses hyperlinks, which link a subject from one article to another. For example, someone reading the article on the country of Croatia, might see a sentence like, "Many of its tourists come to practice NATURISM." If they click on the word "NATURISM" they're immediately re-directed to that article.
6.) Your writings can be re-edited by others endlessly. Hopefully, this will result in improvements. Copywrite is under the GNU Free Documentation License.
Editing Instructions:
1.) Pls. read the entire Wikipedia article (and any mentioned sub-articles) before doing any editing.
2.) To edit, click on the third tab "Edit this page." If you want to create a user account (free and recommended), go to the upper right of any page (login/Create Acct.) Otherwise, your IP address will be permanently posted on the "history" page (4th tab) upon saving any edits.
3.) Some of Wikipedia's features are too advanced for beginners (e.g. photos). Here's all the code you'll need to start with:
The [[Adamites]], a [[Gnostic]] sect, practiced [[Nudity in religion|religious nudism]].
In the above sentence:
[[Adamites]] has it's own article, the brackets are to create a hyperlink to the article.
[[Gnostic]] is a adjective, but it's close enough so that the internet server can figure out the noun "Gnosticism."
[[Nudity in religion|religious nudism]] The article reads "...practiced religious nudism." However, no article exists named "religious nudism." In this case, the name of the article ("Nudity in religion") needs to come BEFORE the actual readable text, with EVERYTHING in ONE SET of brackets. On most keyboards, the separator is above the backslash key.
''Italic Type'' 2 apostrophes
'''BOLD TYPE''' 3 apostrophes
==New topic within an article== 2 equals
===New sub-topic within an article=== 3 equals
4.) When finished editing, click on the "Show preview" button, and be sure everything is correct. (If not, make more corrections at the bottom.) Then click on "Save page."
If any hyperlink shows up in red on preview, the link does not exist or has been misspelled.
Here are some of Wikipedia's naturism articles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_painting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_naturism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinny_dipping
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudity_and_children
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nude_beach
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_social_nudity_places
|
Country:
| Posts: 7 |
|
|
Cheri
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/17/2008 : 12:48:12 PM
|
The problem with Wikipedia is that ANYONE can and has changed what nudists have written. It has happened to me. I have tried several times. In fact, someone started a topic about me, and someone else queried what was written. It was pulled as some of the information wasn't verifiable to the general public.
Cheri Alexander
Doing what I can to positively promote nudism
-
-
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3519 |
 |
|
|
WKPDA
New Member
|
Posted - 02/17/2008 : 9:37:27 PM
|
I'm not sure what happened to Cheri, but regardless, I should have mentioned that first person experiences are not allowed on Wikipedia. There are biographies of notable people, but the only naturist-related biography I can think of, is on Ilsley Boone. (Not including a great, many people who were/are naturists, but are more well-known for something else.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilsley_Boone
Cheri is correct in stating that anything on Wikipedia should be verifiable. You can reference other websites while editing using this code: (note only one bracket, not two)
Example (ignore the underline):
<ref>[http://www.nudist-resorts.org/talk]</ref>
Of course, most references should have more stature than a forum like this one. For example, a nude beach could have a reference to its official home page. These reference links only show up as a footnote in the article itself.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 7 |
|
|
|
Cheri
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/18/2008 : 09:33:30 AM
|
It wasn't personal experiences that was there. It was a statement that Veal Johnson posted. I have hundreds of emails acknowledging what I have done as far as introducing people to nudism, in getting the reluctant partner to try nudism. I was a moderator on one of the first nudist message boards (Prodigy) among other things.
Cheri
Doing what I can to positively promote nudism
-
-
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3519 |
|
|
|
nudeisntlewd
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/18/2008 : 12:36:37 PM
|
Sorry, I wouldn't even consider reading anything on Wikipedia! I learned long ago that there is no verification of facts and that anyone, but anyone can post their "information" without any qualification whatsoever, and can alter entries originated by others. Therefore the factual integrity of anything found there is at best questionable and at worst can be fraudulent since you don't know if it was fact to start with or altered by third parties later. This is about as classic an example of the Internet being "The Disinformation Highway" as it gets. The concept is good, but the application is seriously flawed. At least in a forum such as this, topics are honest discussions where we know that we are sharing points of view, not necessarily points of fact. And here, I and I alone can edit my posts, with the exception of Moderators to remove items that are abusive or offensive to others, off-topic or outside the guidelines of our decency rules.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1191 |
|
|
|
WKPDA
New Member
|
Posted - 02/18/2008 : 11:52:30 PM
|
I think things have gotten better since Wikipedia's early days. There are a lot more administrators than previously.
As Wikipedia is the only top-ten website which has articles on naturism, I wouldn’t dismiss it so easily. Today's youth are spending a lot of time online, and we all know how important they are for the future of naturism. We need to be more vigilant in monitoring Wikipedia's naturism articles. If someone makes an unwise edit, revert it back (see below) and talk about it on the discussion page (2nd tab). (Obvious vandalism needs no discussion, and most of it is caught automatically.)
To revert a Wikipedia article to a previous version:
Go to the page, click on "history", and click on the time and date of the earlier version you want to revert to. It will not work if you click on 'cur' or 'last'.
You will see something like "(Revision as of 07:52 January 28, 2007)" below the title. Make sure this is the one you want to save, then click to edit the page, as you would normally.
You will get a warning, above the edit box, about editing an out-of-date revision.
Ignore the warning and save the page. Be sure to add the word "revert" to the edit summary. Say which one you are reverting to, and why you are doing this.
Should you question the accuracy of something on Wikipedia, at the end of the last sentence being questioned add: {{fact}} (note these brackets are with the Shift key) In the article, this will read as "citation needed."
Perhaps we could all read Wikipedia's naturism articles, and discuss if they need improvement.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 7 |
|
|
|
Admin
Forum Admin
|
Posted - 02/19/2008 : 8:06:55 PM
|
Wikipedia is a noble project, and I'm personally glad it exists. When you need a quick and dirty description of something you've never heard of before, the best bet is clicking on the Wikipedia link in the Google results.
However, I've noticed something still lacking in the hierarchy. When I was considering participating in the articles a couple of years ago, I noticed that the numerous editors at the time couldn't even agree on the name of the topic. It was naturism, then nudism, then something called clothes free. Then back again and around and around. Editors were getting nasty with each other, you would think it was rec.nude or something.
The major controversy about what to name the topic has continued for over 2 years, and is still unresolved at this posting.
A senior editor, an experienced nudist/naturist person put in charge of the topic, would have been able to settle the dispute more decisively. They would have instantly recognized that "clothes free", for instance, was a newer term that was not used nearly as often as nudism or naturism. Still, the person who was making the aggressive changes over and over had admitted he was not a nudist, and had never been to a nudist resort. He was an expert from what he had learnt on the internets.
Still, this person had lots of experience editing lots of other stuff on Wiki, so his opinion held great weight.
I chose not to participate at that time. You might be able to read some of the underlying discussion by clicking one of the tabs on the "what-ever-its-called-now" thread, but some have so aggressively changed things around that old discussions that are still pertinent are lost somewhere in the archive.
Perhaps for subject matter such as ours, Wiki has met its match. Nudism hasn't even been adequately defined in such a way that doesn't spawn endless arguments. We've attempted that here once--StuffedTiger made a valiant effort. It should be attempted again. For poorly defined topics, Wiki would naturally fall down.
I also noticed the controversy about Cheri's article. To many of us, the claims about Cheri Alexander's experience and untiring support of nudism on numerous discussion forums and newsgroups was obvious and not worth arguing. But, someone took it on themselves to be her adversary and contested anything anyone would post about her, it seemed. Now, apparently, Wikipedia's policy is that Cheri Alexander never existed, or is not worth mentioning. All traces of her page, that once existed, are now gone. I'm glad I didn't waste time trying to help build her article. It was already rather accurate, just stating that she ran a certain group, authored an article to help with reluctant partners, and was a moderator for "several" discussion forums. I guess "several" was too imprecise for some editor, and now you see the results. Too bad.
On a related note, our forum here at Nudist-Resorts.Org has proved to be very useful to those familiarizing themselves with nudism for the first time. It's also one of the largest sites on the subject. I'm personally disappointed no one has yet added this website into the section of "other" references on the Wiki article. (To do it myself would technically be self-promotion, which is prohibited on Wiki.)
The listing could look like this, if one was motivated to do such a thing:
Nudist-Resorts.Org - Discussion forum for nudists and those interested in clothing optional or nude recreation, presented by the Society for Understanding Nudism.
On other topics, Wikipedia is a fantastic tool, absolutely fantastic. It's true that everyday people can be great editors. I encourage anyone to participate in editing for Wikipedia, just don't expect too much.
By the way, WKPDA, thank you for your time providing these detailed instructions. Your suggestion to gather some ideas for improving the Wikipedia article on naturism is a good one.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1888 |
|
|
|
WKPDA
New Member
|
Posted - 02/21/2008 : 5:45:13 PM
|
I guess it must have been Cheri's User Page that had the problems. I've never had one, and didn't think of this until now. These are wiki-web pages separate from the main encyclopedia. You can go in to an article's history section and click on the author to view their page. (A red link means there's none.)
In addition, each user has a public discussion page which anyone can edit, and e-mail between users who choose to log on. Unlike the encyclopedia, first-person experiences and opinions are allowed on these user pages.
I would recommend that anyone who wants to edit Wikipedia, just create a login and password, and skip the user page creation. Other users can still send you e-mail, but it's private.
For those who still feel compelled to have a user page, they can limit it to the wiki-icons, which state a user's nationality, languages spoken, generation, religion, hobbies, etc. Use as few or as many of these as you want. There are plenty of other free web site where you can have your own home page with a lot more control over who can and can't post comments, do edits, etc.
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 7 |
|
|
|
Cheri
Forum Member
|
Posted - 02/22/2008 : 09:41:38 AM
|
It was NOT my user page. When the reference to me was deleted, I left the site and have not been back.
Cheri
Doing what I can to positively promote nudism
-
-
|
Edited by - Cheri on 02/22/2008 09:42:47 AM |
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3519 |
|
|
|
Admin
Forum Admin
|
Posted - 02/22/2008 : 11:05:57 AM
|
Confirmed.
It was a short article ("stub" in Wikipeze) of only three sentences or so. It included that Cheri Alexander had Travelites, had written a pamphlet on reluctant partners, and had moderated for numerous newsgroups and forums.
On the discussion tab of that stub article, there was a small amount of discussion challenging the absolute veracity of the newsgroups reference. I believe during that time someone suggested making the reluctant partners reference an actual link to the online resource.
That's the last I saw of that page. Somehow, it got deleted, and deleted good. Someone must have taken it on themselves to just delete the entire article stub.
I know I saw it as a plain text article, a stub article, in Wiki. I remember thinking, hmm, how nice that Cheri is recognized. She has her own page. She and others who have done so much for our cause over the years should have their own pages. It was a good move in that direction.
Now it's gone. All traces of it are gone.
Now look. I designed this website you are reading. I've been a nudist webmaster since years before its creation in 2002. I pay CLOSE ATTENTION to this stuff. Trust me, Cheri's article was there, at a standard Wiki url like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheri_Alexander .
You have no further reason to doubt this. The article was there, was being improved, and was summarily deleted by an unknown party.
That must have been anticipated by the folks designing Wiki. Can you find it in the archives and restore it? I think that would help to restore our confidence in Wikipedia a bit.
Then we can start to talk about spending a lot of time building better nudist/naturist information into Wiki.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1888 |
|
|
|
WKPDA
New Member
|
Posted - 02/23/2008 : 04:36:01 AM
|
Ok, I got it. Sorry we weren't all on the same page. Wish I had had that link to begin with, as I would have known what happened immediately.
It's good to hear how much Cheri has done to promote nudism. Unfortunately, "stub" articles on Wikipedia have been removed quite regularly by administrators.
See this news article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2007/10/11/dlwiki11.xml
Relatively few people are considered "notable" enough to have their own bio article. I was curious myself as to just how famous and notable one must be. For example, for city mayors, the population cut off is at around 200,000 people. The president of the state university I attended does not have a bio article, but all the "Ivy League" presidents do. In other words, the requirement is "nationally recognized."
There is a Wikipedia section that spells out the notability criteria in detail. Be sure to understand what the term "secondary source" means. If the AANR has a press release, and CNN pick up the story, CNN becomes the "secondary source."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BIO
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 7 |
|
|
|
Admin
Forum Admin
|
Posted - 02/26/2008 : 02:34:12 AM
|
Thanks WKPDA, that puts it into perspective.
It IS difficult for persons or information to qualify for inclusion in Wikipedia.
That news article is good reading. What a war--between the inclusionists and the deletionists!
Keep it!
Delete it!
KEEP IT!
DELETE IT!
I WANT TO KEEP IT!!!
I deleted it.
Still, despite these flaws, Wikipedia is a great resource.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1888 |
|
|
|
Cheri
Forum Member
|
Posted - 03/02/2008 : 10:02:19 PM
|
WKPDA, Take a look at - /cheri.html - all of it is verifiable.
My club's new website has been updated by our webmaster today.
Cheri
Doing what I can to positively promote nudism
-
-
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 3519 |
|
|
|
Admin
Forum Admin
|
Posted - 03/02/2008 : 10:50:26 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by WKPDA
Relatively few people are considered "notable" enough to have their own bio article. I was curious myself as to just how famous and notable one must be... the requirement is "nationally recognized."
Fair enough. I did run across this notable nudist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Storey
He has authored a few more published articles than perhaps Cheri. At least it can happen.
I personally wouldn't mind if any individual dedicated to a respectable nude lifestyle like Mayor of the Nude Beach, Larry Fleischman were included as well, non-authorship notwithstanding. I can't imagine how many thousands of people have noticed and depended upon him as a monitor of good beach behavior (no glass on the beach, sir) and a permanent part of the landscape at Haulover Beach.
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1888 |
|
|
|
WKPDA
New Member
|
Posted - 03/03/2008 : 01:55:48 AM
|
It took a while, but I finally figured out how to access the deletion logs. Criteria for "speedy deletion" (CSD) specify the limited cases where administrators may delete Wikipedia pages or media without discussion.
Here's the log entry for Cheri's former page:
14:35, 15 April 2006 Deckiller (Talk | contribs) deleted "Cheri Alexander" (CSD A7)
The criteria code CSD A7 means the following:
Article about a person, group, company, or web content that does not indicate the importance of the subject. Try to use one of the more specific templates rather than {{db-a7}}. You can put {{subst:nn-warn|page name}} ~~~~ on the user's talk page, or, if it seems that someone has created a user page in the encyclopedia section instead of their user page, you can put {{subst:nn-userfy|page name}} -- ~~~~ on their talk page.
The administrator "Deckiller" is still active as of today, and his user page is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deckiller
and you can leave him a note on his talk page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Deckiller
|
|
Country:
| Posts: 7 |
|
|
|
Admin
Forum Admin
|
Posted - 03/05/2008 : 7:14:00 PM
|
Thanks, WKPDA. At least there are traces of what happened. So, where does that leave us, to just send notes of dissatisfaction to the deletist and annoy him back?
I am impressed daily with the wealth of information available on Wikipedia. I'm just beginning to realize that as much or more good information may have been pruned away, never to be seen again. What an amazing process.
I suppose what survives is only what an overwhelming majority can naturally agree on.
WKPDA, how did you get involved with promoting Wikipedia? Just a hobby?
|
|
Country: USA
| Posts: 1888 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
|
|
|
