Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: moot on August 15, 2007, 08:11:31 AM
-
Wikipedia's been on the case of misinformation the like of petty edit wars, but what about bigger fish? Another tech/nerd forum I sometimes read has already had some serious debate of whether some users were on the payroll of big companies, biasing their posts in kind.
Someone more recently compiled Wikipedia's edits and their IP origin (http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/08/wiki_tracker). It was only a matter of time, considering the precedents of national and international media as well as blogs (although the latter is on the far end of the spectrum).
o/t - And speaking of Diebold, they had yet another batch of failures at the Iowa straw polls.
-
If it's in writing and on the internet is HAS to be true!!! Or it wouldn't be there! So there! :furious
-
These gibes against wikipedia are sooo lame. Wiki is being cited as an unreliable source of info as a last ditch effort to discredit someone's argument.
But Wiki is merely a repository of information. Trying to discredit wiki as a source of info is like saying the last book you read was crap because you didn't like the texture of the paper forming the pages, or the type face of the print.
:rolleyes:
-
Ocean, Wiki is discredited because it's possible, due to it's open editing practice, to put any kind of info in, even if it's wrong or misleading.
If the info's false, It has no business being in any kind of repository, period.
-
(http://static.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/stephen-colbert-cc02.jpg)
-
According to a study by Nature, it is slightly more factually accurate than Encyclopedia Brittanica. The two are almost at parity.
Not too shabby.
-
Originally posted by FrodeMk3
Ocean, Wiki is discredited because it's possible, due to it's open editing practice, to put any kind of info in, even if it's wrong or misleading.
If the info's false, It has no business being in any kind of repository, period.
Edits with out proper sources tend to be corrected fairly fast. It's open to edit by anyone is why it's full of the info that it is. It's it's biggest strength but a small weakness.
-
Wikipedia cannot possibly work in theory.
It only works in practice.
-
(http://www.newsvine.com/_vine/images/users/nws/spring/307867.jpg)
'Wikiality' - the method of making something up, but getting enough people to agree with you so it becomes reality.
http://spring.newsvine.com/_news/2006/08/01/307864-stephen-colbert-causes-chaos-on-wikipedia-gets-blocked-from-site
-
Originally posted by rpm
(http://www.newsvine.com/_vine/images/users/nws/spring/307867.jpg)
'Wikiality' - the method of making something up, but getting enough people to agree with you so it becomes reality.
http://spring.newsvine.com/_news/2006/08/01/307864-stephen-colbert-causes-chaos-on-wikipedia-gets-blocked-from-site
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFT4OfdnVpU
hmmmmm
This video has been removed by the user.
-
Sorry, I didn't check the link beforehand, I'm on dialup. I'm sure it's out there somewhere.
-
Chairboy works for Wikipedia if I recall....
:noid
-
I don't work for Wikipedia, but I'm part of the super secret cabal there that conspires to eat babies, controls elections, and keeps the metric system from catching on in the US.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
I don't work for Wikipedia, but I'm part of the super secret cabal there that conspires to eat babies, controls elections, and keeps the metric system from catching on in the US.
Thanks for the metric system thing.:aok
-
Originally posted by Maverick
If it's in writing and on the internet is HAS to be true!!!
Yes, but I would feel much better if it were verified in the newspapers.
:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
Yes, but I would feel much better if it were verified in the newspapers.
:rolleyes:
Well DUH!!! What do you think ask Abbey is there for? :furious
-
Recently, I was kind of wondering if I should make a wikipedia page for myself.
Just in case anybody wants to know about me.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CSD#Articles subsection 7. It'll get deleted on sight.
An article about a person must meet the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOTABLE notability criteria. Wikipedia ain't MySpace or a web provider, it's an encyclopedia.
If you create an account, you can have a user page that describes you, of course. For instance, mine is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chairboy
-
Originally posted by FrodeMk3
Ocean, Wiki is discredited because it's possible, due to it's open editing practice, to put any kind of info in, even if it's wrong or misleading.
If the info's false, It has no business being in any kind of repository, period.
Unless its labeled "FICTION".
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
http://If you create an account, you can have a user page that describes you, of course. For instance, mine is here:[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chairboy
OMG...:rofl Now that *is* the definition of a self-centered nerd! :lol (Not the content of your page mind you, but actually the act of creating that...)
-
As an admin, I'm expected to have it. What's the beef?
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
I don't work for Wikipedia, but I'm part of the super secret cabal there that conspires to eat babies....
I thought you're supposed to be on a diet
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
As an admin, I'm expected to have it. What's the beef?
Oh, you're an admin for Wiki? Then I retract my statment.:aok
-
EA got caught doing this. Someone was able to use that program made by that college student to trace the IP back to someone in EA that was editing the EA wiki site. The person at EA had edited out all information regarding one of the original company founders and anything that painted EA in a negative light.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CSD#Articles subsection 7. It'll get deleted on sight.
An article about a person must meet the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOTABLE notability criteria. Wikipedia ain't MySpace or a web provider, it's an encyclopedia.
If you create an account, you can have a user page that describes you, of course. For instance, mine is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chairboy
Are you implying that I am unimportant?
-
Make an article about yourself if you'd like to find out... :D
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Are you implying that I am unimportant?
Yes.
-
Originally posted by OneWordAnswer
Yes.
OWA, I missed you!
-
What is the reasoning for that rule Chairboy? It would seem that Laser is as famous to us as say....Skuzzy. Would Skuzzy get the ax if he was put on the wiki?
-
Originally posted by nirvana
What is the reasoning for that rule Chairboy? It would seem that Laser is as famous to us as say....Skuzzy. Would Skuzzy get the ax if he was put on the wiki?
Who will be first to make a page for skuzzy?
-
Who was the first to edit reality so it says "reality is a commodity"?
-
Nirvana: Would you expect to find an article about Lasersailor or Skuzzy in an encyclopedia?
Read the notability guidelines I linked to above, they'll help explain if it's still unclear. Wikipedia is not an undifferentiated collection of info or webhost, it's na encyclopedia.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Nirvana: Would you expect to find an article about Lasersailor or Skuzzy in an encyclopedia?
Read the notability guidelines I linked to above, they'll help explain if it's still unclear. Wikipedia is not an undifferentiated collection of info or webhost, it's na encyclopedia.
*cough cough BS cough*