Talk:Development of the Morningside Heights campus - Revision history

Pacman: Pacman moved page Talk:History of the Morningside Heights campus to Talk:Development of the Morningside Heights campus

2024-05-09T21:45:03Z

Pacman moved page Talk:History of the Morningside Heights campus to Talk:Development of the Morningside Heights campus

Ttan at 13:16, 3 May 2007

2007-05-03T13:16:03Z

Ttan at 13:12, 3 May 2007

2007-05-03T13:12:29Z

Nonsensical at 23:37, 2 May 2007

2007-05-02T23:37:05Z

Feinstein at 23:24, 2 May 2007

2007-05-02T23:24:29Z

Reaganaut at 23:22, 2 May 2007

2007-05-02T23:22:16Z

Nonsensical at 23:05, 2 May 2007

2007-05-02T23:05:54Z

Nonsensical at 23:05, 2 May 2007

2007-05-02T23:05:35Z

Reaganaut at 22:51, 2 May 2007

2007-05-02T22:51:19Z

Nonsensical: /* Scholarship */

2007-05-02T22:17:10Z

‎Scholarship

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 ::::: This wiki is a little different. There's no pride of ownership, but there's also no harm in acknowledging good work. And who is to decide what the spirit of a wiki is? A wiki is nothing more than a tool for content management. [[User:Feinstein|Feinstein]] 19:24, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
 :::::: Meh, I still feel like this is unwise practice. So you're saying that if people write articles largely from their own research (though with zero citations, might I point out), they can stamp their claim on it until someone else arbitrarily decides that the community has diluted it enough to warrant removing the credit? I feel like if a reader is genuinely interested in who contributed what, that's exactly what the '''history''' feature is for. [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]] 19:37, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
-::::::: [http://www.columbia.edu/~tt2124/CUHist Original page], with citations (that were too hard to transfer over). [[User:Ttan|Ttan]] 09:12, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
+::::::: [http://www.columbia.edu/~tt2124/CUHist Original page], with citations (that were too hard to transfer over). Also, I didn't "stamp my claim" on this; someone else attributed it to me, which I do appreciate nonetheless :-D. [[User:Ttan|Ttan]] 09:12, 3 May 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:12, 3 May 2007
Line 18:		Line 18:
	::::: This wiki is a little different. There's no pride of ownership, but there's also no harm in acknowledging good work. And who is to decide what the spirit of a wiki is? A wiki is nothing more than a tool for content management. [[User:Feinstein\|Feinstein]] 19:24, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		::::: This wiki is a little different. There's no pride of ownership, but there's also no harm in acknowledging good work. And who is to decide what the spirit of a wiki is? A wiki is nothing more than a tool for content management. [[User:Feinstein\|Feinstein]] 19:24, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
	:::::: Meh, I still feel like this is unwise practice. So you're saying that if people write articles largely from their own research (though with zero citations, might I point out), they can stamp their claim on it until someone else arbitrarily decides that the community has diluted it enough to warrant removing the credit? I feel like if a reader is genuinely interested in who contributed what, that's exactly what the '''history''' feature is for. [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 19:37, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		:::::: Meh, I still feel like this is unwise practice. So you're saying that if people write articles largely from their own research (though with zero citations, might I point out), they can stamp their claim on it until someone else arbitrarily decides that the community has diluted it enough to warrant removing the credit? I feel like if a reader is genuinely interested in who contributed what, that's exactly what the '''history''' feature is for. [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 19:37, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+	::::::: [http://www.columbia.edu/~tt2124/CUHist Original page], with citations (that were too hard to transfer over). [[User:Ttan\|Ttan]] 09:12, 3 May 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:37, 2 May 2007
Line 17:		Line 17:
	::::OK, so we'll remove the attribution to Tao (or just move it to the talk page) as soon as the article(s) start to look rather different to what Tao wrote. How does that sound? {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:22, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		::::OK, so we'll remove the attribution to Tao (or just move it to the talk page) as soon as the article(s) start to look rather different to what Tao wrote. How does that sound? {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:22, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
	::::: This wiki is a little different. There's no pride of ownership, but there's also no harm in acknowledging good work. And who is to decide what the spirit of a wiki is? A wiki is nothing more than a tool for content management. [[User:Feinstein\|Feinstein]] 19:24, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		::::: This wiki is a little different. There's no pride of ownership, but there's also no harm in acknowledging good work. And who is to decide what the spirit of a wiki is? A wiki is nothing more than a tool for content management. [[User:Feinstein\|Feinstein]] 19:24, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+	:::::: Meh, I still feel like this is unwise practice. So you're saying that if people write articles largely from their own research (though with zero citations, might I point out), they can stamp their claim on it until someone else arbitrarily decides that the community has diluted it enough to warrant removing the credit? I feel like if a reader is genuinely interested in who contributed what, that's exactly what the '''history''' feature is for. [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 19:37, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:24, 2 May 2007
Line 16:		Line 16:
	:::I'm not so much concerned about it discouraging people to contribute, I just think it will soon become inaccurate to give such personalized credit to Tao Tan as people contribute and the article evolves. This doesn't apply just to this article, but to this practice in general. I feel it's contrary to the spirit of a wiki (and yes, I know "it's not Wikipedia") because as I understand wiki's, the whole point is that it's the collective knowledge of a community and not the work of one person in particular. [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 19:05, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		:::I'm not so much concerned about it discouraging people to contribute, I just think it will soon become inaccurate to give such personalized credit to Tao Tan as people contribute and the article evolves. This doesn't apply just to this article, but to this practice in general. I feel it's contrary to the spirit of a wiki (and yes, I know "it's not Wikipedia") because as I understand wiki's, the whole point is that it's the collective knowledge of a community and not the work of one person in particular. [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 19:05, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
	::::OK, so we'll remove the attribution to Tao (or just move it to the talk page) as soon as the article(s) start to look rather different to what Tao wrote. How does that sound? {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:22, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		::::OK, so we'll remove the attribution to Tao (or just move it to the talk page) as soon as the article(s) start to look rather different to what Tao wrote. How does that sound? {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:22, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+	::::: This wiki is a little different. There's no pride of ownership, but there's also no harm in acknowledging good work. And who is to decide what the spirit of a wiki is? A wiki is nothing more than a tool for content management. [[User:Feinstein\|Feinstein]] 19:24, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:22, 2 May 2007
Line 15:		Line 15:
	::Also, I don't think mentioning Tao as a significant contributor will at all discourage new contributions. Fewer people will notice his name at the bottom of the article than if citations were peppered throughout the article. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 18:51, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		::Also, I don't think mentioning Tao as a significant contributor will at all discourage new contributions. Fewer people will notice his name at the bottom of the article than if citations were peppered throughout the article. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 18:51, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
	:::I'm not so much concerned about it discouraging people to contribute, I just think it will soon become inaccurate to give such personalized credit to Tao Tan as people contribute and the article evolves. This doesn't apply just to this article, but to this practice in general. I feel it's contrary to the spirit of a wiki (and yes, I know "it's not Wikipedia") because as I understand wiki's, the whole point is that it's the collective knowledge of a community and not the work of one person in particular. [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 19:05, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		:::I'm not so much concerned about it discouraging people to contribute, I just think it will soon become inaccurate to give such personalized credit to Tao Tan as people contribute and the article evolves. This doesn't apply just to this article, but to this practice in general. I feel it's contrary to the spirit of a wiki (and yes, I know "it's not Wikipedia") because as I understand wiki's, the whole point is that it's the collective knowledge of a community and not the work of one person in particular. [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 19:05, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+	::::OK, so we'll remove the attribution to Tao (or just move it to the talk page) as soon as the article(s) start to look rather different to what Tao wrote. How does that sound? {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 19:22, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision	Revision as of 21:45, 9 May 2024
(No difference)

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 ::I think all of Tao's research was on his website at one point, but it's empty now. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 18:51, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
 ::Also, I don't think mentioning Tao as a significant contributor will at all discourage new contributions. Fewer people will notice his name at the bottom of the article than if citations were peppered throughout the article. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 18:51, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
-:::I'm not so much concerned about it discouraging people to contribute, I just think it will soon become inaccurate to give such personalized credit to Tao Tan as people contribute and the article evolves. This doesn't apply just to this article, but to this practice in general. I feel it's contrary to the spirit of a wiki (and yes, I know "it's not Wikipedia") because as I understand wiki's, the whole point is that it's the collective knowledge of a community and not the work of one person in particular.
+:::I'm not so much concerned about it discouraging people to contribute, I just think it will soon become inaccurate to give such personalized credit to Tao Tan as people contribute and the article evolves. This doesn't apply just to this article, but to this practice in general. I feel it's contrary to the spirit of a wiki (and yes, I know "it's not Wikipedia") because as I understand wiki's, the whole point is that it's the collective knowledge of a community and not the work of one person in particular. [[User:Nonsensical|Nonsensical]] 19:05, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:05, 2 May 2007
Line 14:		Line 14:
	::I think all of Tao's research was on his website at one point, but it's empty now. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 18:51, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		::I think all of Tao's research was on his website at one point, but it's empty now. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 18:51, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
	::Also, I don't think mentioning Tao as a significant contributor will at all discourage new contributions. Fewer people will notice his name at the bottom of the article than if citations were peppered throughout the article. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 18:51, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		::Also, I don't think mentioning Tao as a significant contributor will at all discourage new contributions. Fewer people will notice his name at the bottom of the article than if citations were peppered throughout the article. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 18:51, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+	:::I'm not so much concerned about it discouraging people to contribute, I just think it will soon become inaccurate to give such personalized credit to Tao Tan as people contribute and the article evolves. This doesn't apply just to this article, but to this practice in general. I feel it's contrary to the spirit of a wiki (and yes, I know "it's not Wikipedia") because as I understand wiki's, the whole point is that it's the collective knowledge of a community and not the work of one person in particular.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:51, 2 May 2007
Line 12:		Line 12:

	:I disagree with this type of credit. I think that Tao definitely deserves recognition for all this research, but this is a wiki. The hope is that people will add and edit this and it will evolve over time, meaning Tao does not have individual claim over this. Is his original paper posted online somewhere? Can it be credited through citations to that? [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 18:17, 2 May 2007 (EDT)		:I disagree with this type of credit. I think that Tao definitely deserves recognition for all this research, but this is a wiki. The hope is that people will add and edit this and it will evolve over time, meaning Tao does not have individual claim over this. Is his original paper posted online somewhere? Can it be credited through citations to that? [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 18:17, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+	::I think all of Tao's research was on his website at one point, but it's empty now. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 18:51, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
		+	::Also, I don't think mentioning Tao as a significant contributor will at all discourage new contributions. Fewer people will notice his name at the bottom of the article than if citations were peppered throughout the article. {{User:Reaganaut/sig}} 18:51, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:17, 2 May 2007
Line 10:		Line 10:
	:::::Eh, not bad, but could you put it down at the bottom? Thanks.[[User:Ttan\|Ttan]] 14:42, 16 March 2007 (PDT)		:::::Eh, not bad, but could you put it down at the bottom? Thanks.[[User:Ttan\|Ttan]] 14:42, 16 March 2007 (PDT)
	::::::Not much need for a template then. I deleted [[Template:Credit]]. [[User:Admin\|Admin]] 15:57, 16 March 2007 (PDT)		::::::Not much need for a template then. I deleted [[Template:Credit]]. [[User:Admin\|Admin]] 15:57, 16 March 2007 (PDT)
		+
		+	:I disagree with this type of credit. I think that Tao definitely deserves recognition for all this research, but this is a wiki. The hope is that people will add and edit this and it will evolve over time, meaning Tao does not have individual claim over this. Is his original paper posted online somewhere? Can it be credited through citations to that? [[User:Nonsensical\|Nonsensical]] 18:17, 2 May 2007 (EDT)