Wikipedia talk:General disclaimer

Edit request on 8 January 2012

173.23.125.109 (talk) 13:59, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

No request--Jac16888 ^Talk 14:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 February 2012

The servers are now located in California, not Florida. – Zntrip 07:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

No, the Wikimedia Foundation offices are in San Francisco, but many of the servers are still in Florida. Graham87 15:28, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

For or not for dyslexic and blind people?

Is reading content in Wikipedia suitable for dyslexic and blind people? Either way, should there be a disclaimer about and toward people who have difficult sight readings? --George Ho (talk) 01:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

There are some spoken articles available, and whether or not someones dyslexia can affect their ability to read Wikipedia presumably depends on the form their dyslexia takes. What sort of disclaimer are you suggesting be added? "Be aware, if you have trouble reading, you may not be able to read Wikipedia"?--Jac16888 ^Talk 01:22, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Very funny if you're trying. Well, that suggestion is a decent start... However, how's mine: "Wikipedia does not discriminate people with difficult sight readings. Nevertheless, they may have difficulty reading Wikipedia. Spoken articles is well-recommended for them." --George Ho (talk) 01:28, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

That's not really what this page is for, it's more about saying "These are the reasons Wikipedia may piss you off, and this is why it's not our fault". Something like that would be better off in an "accessibility" page, which would probably not be a bad idea to have--Jac16888 ^Talk 01:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

So where is that "Accessibility" page? I could not find one. --George Ho (talk) 01:36, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

That's what I meant, I don't think there is one, but perhaps there should be. Perhaps you could suggest it here--Jac16888 ^Talk 01:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done --George Ho (talk) 02:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Examples

Are there examples that some have taken material and released it, even though they should not? --80.161.143.239 (talk) 15:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, VDM Publishing have been widely criticised for selling duplicates of Wikipedia articles. Graham87 04:21, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Summarizing WP:article size as part of disclaimer?

This guideline is rather discussed in the talk page. After all, there are concerns about reading, loading, and editing a long page. --George Ho (talk) 16:10, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Revise link to non-wikipedia disclaimers?

I don't think it's fair to label the non-wikipedia disclaimers as "similar" right after a sentence about vandalism, since most non-wiki sources are not subject to that particular problem. If the word "similar" is removed, the last sentence can be written as: Note that most other encyclopedias and reference works also have disclaimers. Silas S. Brown (talk) 08:36, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page not moved. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:42, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

---

Wikipedia:General disclaimer → Help:General disclaimer – and the related pages should be moved to Help namespace since they are help pages. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose. How is this a help page? This is a legal disclaimer giving information about the content of Wikipedia (per Wikipedia:Project namespace), and is currently protected from editing due to legal reasons. The last major change was made by an employee of the Wikimedia Foundation (with the edit summary "updated per [WMF] General Consel"),[1] so I wouldn't want to be the one touching it without their consent. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:08, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

• It is a help page because it help readers (as well as editors). And so what are the legal implications of moving the page and leaving a redir? If there are any I would seriously question the legal system that would (namely the US). Maybe I am not afraid of the legal niceties because of my New Zealand "she'll be right" attitude? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 04:41, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Again, a help page gives information about using Wikipedia, not about Wikipedia. I do not see any advantage about moving it. And it may not be a de jure legal implication, but more of a preference by the Wikimedia Foundation, which I would prefer to defer to in this situation. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:47, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Not without a firm instruction from the Foundation's legal side. Heck, I even refused to carry out this edit until Maggie Dennis gave the nod. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:16, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose clearly not a help page. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 20:55, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Acatna (talk) 12:48, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 15 August 2013

94.69.153.82 (talk) 00:47, 15 August 2013 (UTC) Template:Επεξεργασία προστατευμένα <-! Αρχίστε αίτημα -> ~ ~ ~ ~ <- - αίτημα End!>

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:22, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request November 2013

Per the current discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Correction to general disclaimer, please remove "We are working on ways to select and highlight reliable versions of articles" since it no longer applies. Cheers. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 21:36, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

This request seems reasonable. It's fine to make thoughtful edits to this text. It's not tied to a Board resolution or anything like that. As I said on the noticeboard, we may want to centralize these disclaimers (it looks like we have five) on Meta-Wiki at some point. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:41, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Done. Killiondude (talk) 04:11, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Killiondude. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 10:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Edit request November 2013 (2)

Please delete the word "similar" from the following passage, because it seems to be misleading in this immediate context:

"The content of any given article may recently have been changed, vandalized or altered by someone whose opinion does not correspond with the state of knowledge in the relevant fields. Note that most other encyclopedias and reference works also have similar disclaimers."

Taken at face value, that seems to say "most other encyclopedias and reference works" have disclaimers similar to "the content of any given article may recently have been changed, vandalized or altered". Most encyclopedias and reference works are not wikis, and the disclaimers linked to don't seem to include this point. Therefore I suggest dropping the word "similar" and just having "Note that most other encyclopedias and reference works also have disclaimers." (Perhaps the words "also have disclaimers" can be in the link.) Silas S. Brown (email, talk) 15:38, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree; the present wording is odd. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 15:44, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Done. I agree as well. Cheers. Thingg^⊕⊗ 05:26, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Silas S. Brown (email, talk) 13:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

house dog

is a dolphin a creek is ugly just love their to go o'clock hey this is Elvis stupid Jaywilliams808 (talk) 13:16, 18 November 2013 (UTC)