Talk:Meta-discussion

Philosophy: Logic / Language Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic
	Philosophy of language

Oh no, meta-meta-discussion![edit]

Meta-discussion may seem artificial and even a waste of time as opposed to actual consideration of a topic. Interestingly, on his user page, Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales expresses a wish to keep meta-discussion of Wikipedia to a minimum on the encyclopedia's website.

While I certainly appreciate the irony of having this here, with a link to Jimbo's principle that we shouldn't have it here, maybe we should rewrite this to use non-Wikipedia sources. Twinxor t 22:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't resist the irony. There are already a number of non-Wikipedia examples in the article, so why not use Jimbo's comment, too? It adds a little humor (smile). Casey Abell 04:10, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another user removed the Jimbo example. I won't get into an edit war over this because the change hardly affects the article, but using Jimbo's remark seems harmless to me. It's a valid example of the use of the term "meta-discussion," and it lightens the article's tone a little. And since this is the meta-discussion article, the example doesn't "look inward" but is actually on-topic for the article. Casey Abell 12:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If Wikipedia is not the appropriate venue for discussing Wikipedia , then where is the appropriate venue? There is a vast backlog of topics in need of a public discussion, so that we can clear the are and move forward as a neutral group. Washuchan73 (talk) 05:12, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]