Comments:English Wikipedia publishes 3 millionth article

Well, this is considered an article too... 99.236.129.191 (talk) 15:52, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I consider this article to be an example of extreme navel-gazing. --65.51.209.124 (talk) 16:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


 * That's the sort of article I see on a constant basis when I used to edit myself (and before you ask, I accumulated over 5000 edits before I quit)...and what's more, it took me less than 15 seconds to find two of those kind of article.

1/3 of the articles is pop culture stuff. another 1/3 is stubs for municipalities. the other 1/3 are true articles.

Wikipedia & Web 2.0
I think Wikipedia's success can be attributed to the simplicity of the system itself. Wikipedia is one of the better examples of a Web 2.0 development. Unlike national or local news channels that broadcast one-way information to viewers, Wiki survives on information published from and absorbed by end users, like myself. Unlike other social networking tools that have developed over the last decade that serve a specific purpose [exposing yourself to a mass amount of people], Wikipedia will not solely be a trend. It acts as more than a social networking site, it is a pool of information that can be used for school projects, company reviews, or simply to settle curiosity about a subject. Furthermore, it is a more credible source of information, than is Facebook per se because articles are screened before they are published. Wikipedia even has a search component - which it can modify to be more fit for a Web 3.0 world. Congrats Wikipedia for your success! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thinkroshni (talk • contribs) 16:13, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Comments from feedback form - "*******"

 * &mdash;68.1.84.244 (talk) 18:03, 14 March 2011 (UTC)