Wikipedia Critics Are Behind The Times - UConn Daily Campus (subscription) Options

[Newsfeed]

Wikipedia Critics Are Behind The Times
UConn Daily Campus (subscription), CT -20 minutes ago
The free encyclopedia. Free of charge and free to edit, it's the ninth most popular Web site on the internet; 8.2 percent of internet users check it daily. ...


View the article[br]

[guy]

Seriously misguided article.

And less than 10 percent of academics - less than one in 10 of the professionally knowledgeable - make any attempt to help it along. Ph.D's and laureates are some of the first to advance upon it, torches in hand and scorn on their lips.

[GlassBeadGame]

Seriously misguided article.

And less than 10 percent of academics - less than one in 10 of the professionally knowledgeable - make any attempt to help it along. Ph.D's and laureates are some of the first to advance upon it, torches in hand and scorn on their lips.

A mob of torch waving professors hounding the villagers and their noble monster.

[Jonny Cache]

And less than 10 percent of academics - less than one in 10 of the professionally knowledgeable — make any attempt to help it along. Ph.D's and laureates are some of the first to advance upon it, torches in hand and scorn on their lips.

Seriously misguided article.

{{↓Plot Spoiler↓}}

A mob of torch waving professors hounding the villagers and their noble monster.

Careful, say any more and you'll be costing Don Murphy $$$ Big Bucks $$$ by skunking the plot of his next movie, and you know that some of his operatives are Transformers.

Jonny

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache: Fri 12th October 2007, 8:06pm

[The Joy]

Many major articles have their own dedicated team of amateur experts who check the article many times per day. Inaccurate edits are reverted quickly. Wikipedia has a host of system-wide admins who will roll-back poor edits within minutes, and the more blatant vandalisms are usually automatically destroyed by computerized watchdogs. As Levar Burton might say, "Don't take my word for it". Go ahead and try to vandalize a major Wikipedia article. Time how long the edit lasts.

<Tweety Bird>He don't frequent WP much, do he?</Tweety Bird> I mean, sure vandalism is reverted quickly... unless you're a prominent living historian or a living person at all! Or an article is "owned" by a couple of corrupted Slim Virgins keeping the article in a messed up or biased state for one's own agenda. And what about those obscure articles no one cares about and the Vandal Fighters miss?

Did he just encourage us to vandalize? CLOWN REDIRECT!

And isn't "amateur expert" an oxymoron? Or just a regular moron?

OH, THE HILARITY!

[guy]

And what if the real experts have all been banned as alleged sockpuppets?

[thekohser]

The article has a comment now.