Comments on: Now that’s tragic! http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20090613/now-thats-tragic/ It's only a website... it's only a website... Wed, 22 May 2013 15:34:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: James http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20090613/now-thats-tragic/#comment-2064 James Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:24:15 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/?p=275#comment-2064 The inclusionist/deletionist dichotomy is a false one for Wikipedia and using it as an example shows a considered lack of knowledge about how Wikipedia operates. The problem is not the reign of one group over another, but the lack of reasoned support for the actions on either side. The corps of deletionists are just as strong and irrational as the inclusionists, such that interesting and sourced articles are also deleted nearly out of hand while some obscure and under-visited ones linger for strangely long periods. I suggest you test your assertion that Mr. X would survive a deletion request. I would even bet money on it that your are wrong. Live among your enemies a bit before you judge them without knowledge. The inclusionist/deletionist dichotomy is a false one for Wikipedia and using it as an example shows a considered lack of knowledge about how Wikipedia operates. The problem is not the reign of one group over another, but the lack of reasoned support for the actions on either side. The corps of deletionists are just as strong and irrational as the inclusionists, such that interesting and sourced articles are also deleted nearly out of hand while some obscure and under-visited ones linger for strangely long periods. I suggest you test your assertion that Mr. X would survive a deletion request. I would even bet money on it that your are wrong.

Live among your enemies a bit before you judge them without knowledge.

]]> By: No Name http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20090613/now-thats-tragic/#comment-2032 No Name Mon, 29 Jun 2009 15:03:43 +0000 http://wikipediareview.com/blog/?p=275#comment-2032 If you think that's good; I suggest a look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Colonel_Chaos/study Rather than obscure figures, this study focused on featured articles, Wikipedia's "best" work. None of the changes lasted for two weeks, but it took two days before anyone realized that the Second Crusade wasn't led by Gregory Peck, Bill Cosby, and Harry Potter? (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Second_Crusade&diff=127164590&oldid=126710465). It also took almost a day before anyone noticed that butter isn't illegal "in most Western cultures. If you think that’s good; I suggest a look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Colonel_Chaos/study Rather than obscure figures, this study focused on featured articles, Wikipedia’s “best” work. None of the changes lasted for two weeks, but it took two days before anyone realized that the Second Crusade wasn’t led by Gregory Peck, Bill Cosby, and Harry Potter? (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Second_Crusade&diff=127164590&oldid=126710465). It also took almost a day before anyone noticed that butter isn’t illegal “in most Western cultures.

]]>