Talk:Online encyclopedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

The Global Encyclopedia

I was looking at an old version of my home page, something I had maintained between 1996-1999, and saw that I had written this "The Global Encyclopedia. Which is the only free encyclopedia in the world." and provided a hyperlink to . I can't recall anything about this internet encyclopedia any longer, but given my time of writing this, it would have been a fairly early effort, potentially worth listing in this article, if information from a reliable source could be found. Can anyone locate information about this? Brianwc (talk) 13:50, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Just when I was ready to give up, I may have answered my own question. An article from 1995 discusses the Global Encyclopedia at length, in a highly critical manner, in what would now be seen as the same objections Wikipedia faced in its early days (and sometimes still faces?). James Rettig, "Putting the Squeeze on the Information Firehose: The Need for 'Neteditors and 'Netreviewers" 15th Annual Charleston Conference on Library Acquisitions (Nov. 3, 1995). The date of this article demonstrates just how early the "Global Encyclopedia" effort must have been. Additional sources should be sought and then perhaps a short summary could be added to this article. Brianwc (talk) 14:07, 15 June 2012 (UTC) looks like a dead link. Elfalem (talk) 00:44, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Article lead not very comprehensive

The lead for Internet encyclopedia seems to leave off with an overview of a 1993 project that eventually failed. I think it be appropriate to describe what happened to internet encyclopedias since. Something like: 'Since the project, internet encyclopedias have substantially grown in accessibility (or popularity).' FactoidDroid (talk) 22:40, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

That's a good idea. Palindrome2788 (talk) 04:26, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 24 April 2015

The following is a closed 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: Move. Cúchullain t/c 16:02, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

– as per WP:UCRN as demonstrated by Trend use of search terms and Ngrams. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 17:27, 1 May 2015 (UTC) GregKaye 16:02, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Support It's a series of tubes. Randy Kryn 19:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose "online" has several different meanings, being on the internet is just one of them. -- (talk) 03:33, 25 April 2015 (UTC) Which definitions of "online"/"online encyclopedia" do you think would cause confusion?
While I think it may be fair to comment that "Internet encyclopedia" would be widely interpreted as being descriptive of an "Internet-based encyclopedia" I think that it also fair to comment that this term is also ambiguous.
For instance there is a three volume, very physical book set "The Internet Encyclopedia" which follows the same format of titling as A Native American Encyclopedia..., J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia..., The Freud Encyclopedia... and Body Encyclopedia amongst others.
Online is an adjective. Internet is a typically used as a noun. GregKaye 08:30, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • First off, lol at the idea that this is somehow less precise. L. O. L. Support as proposed. Red Slash 05:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I have no objection to the move, although this broadens the scope. An "online encyclopedia" merely needs to be hosted on a computer (network); there could be private online encyclopedias hosted on private networks; information services such as CompuServe hosted encyclopedias (primitive compared to this one) back in the day. Wbm1058 (talk) 02:51, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
That's why you get movement on the Ngram starting around 1980. People weren't using the Internet in the 1980s to access those online encyclopedias. Wbm1058 (talk) 02:55, 1 May 2015 (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.

duplicating list?

It looks like this list duplicates a lot of list of Internet encyclopedias while also linking to it. What is the basis for including some but not others? I see there's a section for "current" and one for those "no longer online", which would seem to be inclusive of everything. Any reason not to remove the list and leave the Main template? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

 Done Merged one to the list article and removed as redundant. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:28, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Online encyclopedia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

  • Added archive to
  • Added archive to
  • Added archive to

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:11, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

@InternetArchiveBot: I added correspondig titles to the references instead of the same 'Archived copy' title found before my edit. Thanks! --Naeem2017 (talk) 20:11, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

No mention of Wikipedia

I find it very amusing that no mention of Wikipedia, surely the most extensive and comprehensive online encyclopedia in the world, has no information about itself in its own article on the subject. Teratix (talk) 04:05, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

An editor removed Wikipedia with a misleading edit summary.[1] I have reverted it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:37, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Talk:Online encyclopedia"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA