Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
An editor must be
aware before they can be sanctioned.
With respect to any reverting restrictions:
Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as clear vandalism.
Clear vandalism of any origin may be reverted without restriction.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors that are not vandalism are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to
the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.
If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptocurrency, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
cryptocurrency 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.CryptocurrencyWikipedia:WikiProject CryptocurrencyTemplate:WikiProject CryptocurrencyWikiProject Cryptocurrency articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Internet 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.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
[[Bitcoin#Energy consumption and carbon footprint|environmental impact of cryptocurrencies]] The anchor (#Energy consumption and carbon footprint)
has been deleted.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors
Misleading introduction
> Web3 (also known as Web 3.0) is an idea for a new iteration of the World Wide Web...
The sources provided, are links to editorial pieces (Wired, TechCrunch, RTInsights) which give nothing more than opinion.
Also this claim is not true, judging by the article about
Semantic Web, or Web 3.0, which states that the term Web 3.0 should not be confused with Web3. As pointed out Web 3.0 is an extension of the World Wide Web through standards set by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), as the source in that article links.
183.98.164.96 (
talk) 05:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)reply
I agree, direct link from the article Web Semantic is basically a no consistency that needs to be ruled one way or the other. I would agree that web3 has very little to do with semantic web that was considered at least for 10 years to be web3.0 (not surr if still the case but as this is a W3c standard, this still has some value)
2A01:CB09:D044:F680:1CDB:94EC:7CA0:FB56 (
talk) 16:22, 8 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Agreed, as well, I think that aside should be removed entirely.
Myforce2001 (
talk) 18:21, 13 July 2023 (UTC)reply
Web3 (the cryptocurrency/blockchain version of it described at this article, not the semantic web) is routinely called "web 3.0". There are plenty of other sources that could be added if for some reason the three existing ones don't suffice, such as:
"It’s called Web 3.0 or Web3, and it’s a blockchain-based Internet..." –
Britannica
"Web 3.0 or Web3, a loosely defined vision for a decentralized internet that uses technologies including blockchain..." –
WSJ
A whole article using the term throughout –
Bloomberg
"...the rapidly evolving blockchain space. That space, often hyped as Web 3.0, refers to an old, yet-to-be-realized idea of a decentralized Internet relying on peer-to-peer technologies. But Web 3.0 has also become a buzzword that refers to the expansion of the so-called metaverse..." –
Washington Post
"...blockchain and so-called decentralized Web 3.0 ventures..." –
Reuters
Some (including
Tim Berners-Lee) have tried to make the distinction that "web3" refers to the crypto/blockchain idea and "web 3.0" to the semantic web, but I think the terms are so similar that that hasn't really caught on.
GorillaWarfare (she/her •
talk) 01:10, 14 July 2023 (UTC)reply
hi GorillaWarfare
Quoting from mainstream media of WSJ, Bloomberg, Washington Post does not determine the scientific basis. Scientist Tim Berners-Lee is the oracle of Web 3.0, the single source of truth. Conflating Tim's semantic Web 3.0 with a marketing deviation from the blockchain tech industry is consistently pointed out by Tim. It's not an opinion. Your 'reversion' of my correction directly conflicts with the Terminology section below it:
Web3 is distinct from Tim Berners-Lee's 1999 concept for a Semantic Web. In 2006, Berners-Lee described the Semantic Web as a component of Web 3.0, which is different from the meaning of Web3 in blockchain contexts.
Web3 IS NOT 'also known as Web 3.0'. Can you revert to my correction asap to fix the contradiction in the page?
Bethcarey (
talk) 15:55, 16 February 2024 (UTC)reply
The scientist says the terms are not similar. Don't let Wikipedia be driven by marketing obfuscation, especially when the scientist is so consistently clear, and alive, to defend thank goodness.
Please review Wikipedia's requirements for
WP:RS. This article already points out what you have mentioned: that there are two completely distinct concepts with similar names. However, the fact of the matter is that people regularly use the term "Web 3.0" to refer to the blockchain concept. We need to mention how the terms are used in common parlance, not try to create some ideologically pure distinction between "web3" and "web 3.0" that simply doesn't exist.
GorillaWarfare (she/her •
talk) 18:12, 16 February 2024 (UTC)reply
The bots on Twitter and the gullible crowd do, sure, but why would we care about their garbage? No need to validate that crap.