I am told that Ryan’s Wikipedia entry was submitted for review this past Saturday, October 12th. I again want to thank Josh for volunteering to pull this together. It’s always inspiring when people I never met are touched enough to help keep Ryan relevant. He did an amazing job! It was so concise and informative that I added it to the website as a way for new readers to get on-board in a hurry. It’s the earlier version, but I’ll jump on getting the most recent to replace it.As for Wikipedia, now we must wait to see if it gets approved. According to the folks at over there they are “highly backlogged” with pending articles in the pipeline. They are advising that it is a possible two to three week wait until they get to it; there are nearly 1,300 entries ahead of Ryan’s. That could be frustrating, I suppose, but this time allows for the article’s refinement. You’re suggestions were passed along and (most) will be incorporated. Many already have. An example of this is that over 35 references were added to verify the facts. Another is the insertion of links to key terms.
Heck, even if Wikipedia doesn’t approve it there is no arguing that it will do wonders for this website. Truth is, I’ve been struggling for years on how to introduce new readers to the website and this fits the bill perfectly.
You have two ways to see the most recent revision. I recommend the second one. First, I was provided the link to the “sandbox” (i.e., draft) article and downloaded the 5 pages — in PDF format — this morning. Here is the link: wikipedia 10-15-13. Second, you may also view it how I suggest, as a web page in Wikipedia’s sandbox, by clicking this link (it will open a new window/tab in your browser so you can keep this post active).
Again, thank you Josh for the hard work on creating an outstanding document. Also, a special thank you to those who offered their valuable suggestions and critiques. Ahhh, Team Diviney… you’re the best!