This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Reference works, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Reference worksWikipedia:WikiProject Reference worksTemplate:WikiProject Reference worksReference works articles
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:
Could someone please explain why the Mundaneum is more "more appropriately, [like] Wikipedia?" It seems to work more like the WWW than Wikipedia, as this would be something that Otlet's employees work on and set in a fixed definition, not "an encyclopedia that anyone can edit." If it does not fit the definition, it looks like a POV issue. Please tell me if I'm wrong. Loknar (talk)
I agree, this is just a writers personal opinion. --109.34.15.26 (talk) 22:37, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]