If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Time)   Wikipedia banned 250 users who were getting paid to promote certain products. They are also working on ferreting out editors who don't know what they are doing. [citation needed]   (newsfeed.time.com) divider line 12
    More: Interesting, Wikipedia, citation needed, sock puppets  
•       •       •

1144 clicks; posted to Geek » on 22 Oct 2013 at 8:54 AM (51 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-10-22 09:10:58 AM  
3 votes:

Felgraf: Leader O'Cola: ban IP addresses that trace to government , lobbying groups, and 'think tanks'.

Counter-argument: That would also ban anyone who works in a government lab, who might, on science-related issues, know WTF they are talking about.


They shouldn't be updating Wikipedia from the lab.
2013-10-22 09:04:13 AM  
3 votes:

Leader O'Cola: ban IP addresses that trace to government , lobbying groups, and 'think tanks'.


Counter-argument: That would also ban anyone who works in a government lab, who might, on science-related issues, know WTF they are talking about.
2013-10-22 09:27:55 AM  
2 votes:

Latinwolf: DeathByGeekSquad: Felgraf: Leader O'Cola: ban IP addresses that trace to government , lobbying groups, and 'think tanks'.

Counter-argument: That would also ban anyone who works in a government lab, who might, on science-related issues, know WTF they are talking about.

They shouldn't be updating Wikipedia from the lab.

Point being they should be using their private PC's for updating on Wikipedia, not the PC's where they work.


...He said on fark during the workday.
2013-10-22 08:58:57 AM  
2 votes:
ban IP addresses that trace to government , lobbying groups, and 'think tanks'.
2013-10-22 05:46:29 PM  
1 votes:

Ishkur: SpectroBoy: The people who make it as accurate as printed encyclopedia?

I can think of an entire field of study in which Wikipedia is not only less than remotely accurate, but actually passes off misinformation and bad information so appalling it borders on retarded ignorance.


I'm actually working with some industry people right now to fix something along those lines.  Short version: some merge-happy editors did not understand that there is a distinction between additive manufacturing and 3d printing (short version: 3d printing is only one specific type of additive manufacturing) and merged the two articles.

The problem I'm finding is that industry people who actually have the correct technical knowledge also have absolutely no idea how to edit Wikipedia, mostly because Wikipedia has its own weird rules concerning tone, style, process, sourcing, so on and so forth.  There is nothing writing-wise in the business or professional world that will prepare you to write articles for Wikipedia.  You need to find someone experienced at it and then get them to do the edits.  Most of them don't though; most of them just try pushing their edits that they JUST KNOW ARE CORRECT, despite coming off sounding like an advertisement or something else.  Then the edits get undone by marginal editors on the basis of tone, not content, and the cycle repeats until someone gets banned.  Lovely system.
2013-10-22 05:37:42 PM  
1 votes:

Ishkur: I can think of an entire field of study in which Wikipedia is not only less than remotely accurate, but actually passes off misinformation and bad information so appalling it borders on retarded ignorance.


But can you name it?
2013-10-22 12:43:19 PM  
1 votes:

enik: SpectroBoy: fluffy2097: If they ban all the editors who don't know what they are doing, who will be left to run wikipedia?

The people who make it as accurate as printed encyclopedia?

Study: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica (link)   http://news.cnet.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html

That's only because Wikipedia's sperging child editors plagiarize  real encyclopedias.


In many areas Wikipedia exceeded the Encyclopedia. That is some mighty fine plagiarism there.
2013-10-22 12:13:17 PM  
1 votes:
I can't edit Wikipedia. They don't permit logins from mobile providers, and apparently truck stop, McDonalds and Burgerkings are banned as well. If you are on the road (which I am, permanently now, going to get an RV in a bit to write from as we travel perpetually) there is no editing permitted.

I wonder how much banning they can get away with and still be considered "something anyone can edit." Because that is a very conditional statement right now.
2013-10-22 11:41:42 AM  
1 votes:

gingerjet: And yet I still find basic errors every other time I use it for anything serious.


Wikipedia is a wonderful place to find actual primary sources for your research paper.

If you cite wikipedia as a primary source, you should be expelled.
2013-10-22 10:36:30 AM  
1 votes:

Latinwolf: Point being they should be using their private PC's for updating on Wikipedia, not the PC's where they work.


Why not?  I look forward to your well thought out explanation.
2013-10-22 09:34:57 AM  
1 votes:

fluffy2097: If they ban all the editors who don't know what they are doing, who will be left to run wikipedia?


The people who make it as accurate as printed encyclopedia?

Study: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica (link)   http://news.cnet.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html
2013-10-22 09:30:27 AM  
1 votes:
This could take a lot of the fun out of certain entries.
 
Displayed 12 of 12 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report