Changing The Slogan

Changing the slogan I would propose a change to Wikipedia: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can on Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can . What do you think Dalton2 (talk) 10:27 July 28, 2008 (UTC) A good idea for it is more inclusive. In fact, in the same way that there is a page link in the “free-content encyclopedia” add internal link on the word “” to the page that explains how to or how to participate (I can not remember). – The (talk) 10:35 July 28, 2008 (UTC) No. It is less inclusive. In Spanish, the third person, referring to someone who is neither the sender nor the receiver has a tinge of impersonality which benefits its use for general references.In parallel, the underlying issuer of that message is not anyone in particular, as could be that we use, it is a corporate message that requires a formulation as impersonal as possible, be open to any reader, including those who do not even read the message, something that does not include such can and that, conversely, that may itself into account. – Camima (talk) 12:16 July 28, 2008 (UTC) According to the explanation of Camima, is less inclusive. Varano (Talk) 12:19 July 28, 2008 (UTC) I’ve convinced Camima.Dalton2 (talk) 13:19 July 28, 2008 (UTC) Well, I do not feel convinced, but hey, if you have to be business as usual it also seems wrong. It makes me doubt if what you “want” that is Wikipedia is an institution with impersonal formulations as possible, needing as it is (in my opinion, of course) the close involvement of particular individuals. Anyway, it said, I’m not convinced, but if you guess it should suffice.What about you to link to – The (talk) 17:45 July 28, 2008 (UTC) is that, frankly, if I enter for the first time on Wikipedia and read the free encyclopedia that anyone can , the first thing I would think would be: what do I have do to be part of that “all of us” that is present in can I mean, when you use the first person plural, it automatically creates a kind of publishing community seems to pre-exist to the reader who has just arrived. And, as you know, not so: the reader can get, and leave never to return without ever hearing a thing. Needless to say, this is quite a subtle language, no great importance. As for the link, it seems to me well. You should suggest, and the other too, in discussing the cover. – Camima (talk) 17:59 July 28, 2008 (UTC) anime, presents your proposal.Although I agree with one part of the reasons given by Camima, in the end prefer to “work.” To begin your quest in your name and mine, I’ll make a little political aide and I’ll give some weapons: Wikipedia is preferred in the treatment of all the pages you welcome, help, tutorials, etc. without even knowing in advance who it is for that text, and if the want to read it or not familiarly, the contention that this will create a more colloquial, which we maintain all users of Wikipedia. And I agree, and I presume good faith on the part of all and those who do not wish to be tuteados final consent to be, understanding that this familiarity is done with the utmost respect.Extrapolating the situation to the motto of Wikipedia, I think it would be consistent with that same spirit to replace “may” “can, since even those who read it has nothing to do with the Wikipedia community, presumably accept that the collective Wikipedia wants who is reading (or even who is not) to become or of Wikipedia, which happens even after one and only ion. Furthermore, analyzing the statement “the encyclopedia that anyone can “, we see that it is logically correct, since it is logically valid include those who do not read the text on the term “all”, and also logically valid to attribute a capacity to set: us them us, which means that they 0, ie that Wikipedia accepts each and every one of the world’s human beings as equals at the time of entry. Moreover, the use of “may” creates an impersonal air an entity’s own robotic and devoid of personality.It does not show the true human nature of Wikipedia, which, beyond an encyclopedia written from the sky, is a compendium of ideas of thousands of human beings, that we are ourselves. Dalton2 (talk) 7:41 July 30, 2008 (UTC) What makes you think that everyone will enter the No matter how inclusive it is, readers are not going to be inside. With the amount of things to do … Eric – July 30, 2008 7:56 Contact (UTC) But why do not you read the sentence correctly There is “free to all” but “the encyclopedia that anyone can .”