Talk:List of technology centers/Archives/2014
 | This is an archive of past discussions about List of technology centers. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Lead image
I'm opposing to having a single technology center as a lead picture here, as this could easily generate the impression of fueling an advantage in competition, this is a highly commercially important topic. Let's take it out. -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 14:58, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
- I don't oppose the image. It provides context. I find it hard to believe that someone would make a business decision based on the placement of an image in a Wikipedia article. If they do, they deserve the consequence of their decision. Furthermore, its caption clearly points out that it is just one technology center, not THE tech center or THE BEST tech center. I think it's appropriate and a boon to the list. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 14:48, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Dunno. It sort of feels like having a specific current model at the top of Automobile. I'd rather root for having the 1st technology center ever on top, a map of tech clusters, or no image at all. -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 21:35, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- I wouldn't be opposed to changing the image to one of Silicon Valley, which the lead clearly points out the world's first and prime tech center. It's a good image, though, so I'd like to keep it somewhere in the article. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:18, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Knowledge Center link is wrong
There is a reference to The Knowledge Center in India, but the link directs to an area known as the Knowledge Corridor in the United States. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.228.224.96 (talk) 15:48, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Red links
Normally red links (links to articles that don't exist) in articles are considered fine, as they encourage the creation of new articles. However, in this article, I think we should forbid adding links to "technology centers" that don't have articles, since otherwise it's just a spam magnet. Any objections? — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 14:24, 13 June 2014 (UTC)