Disparity of biography articles Options

[EricBarbour]

Yet another example of the profound idiocy of "crowdsourcing" encyclopedia articles.

You have the WP bio of Hans Bethe, legendary atomic scientist, Nobel winner.
8 notes, 3 references, total length 27034 bytes.

And you have the WP bio of a fictional scientist on a sitcom, Sheldon Cooper of The Big Bang Theory.
75 references, total length 43670 bytes.

And no doubt, many of the Wiki-assholes reading this will go "that's perfectly acceptable".

[EricBarbour]

Wikipedia's problems are not much different from the problems of the open-source software world.

A friend send me this link today. Typical story, unfortunately.

Who gives a shit. If you don't pay for it, and you don't contribute code to it, you're a drone at best and should be ignored.

I write open source because I feel like it (an itch to scratch) and in hopes that other people will make software that I use better. If other people want to use it then that's cool but affects me not at all negatively or positively.

Sounds like David Gerard, JzG or Rodhullandemu, doesn't it?

This post has been edited by EricBarbour:

[Encyclopedist]

Wikipedia's problems are not much different from the problems of the open-source software world.

A friend send me this link today. Typical story, unfortunately.

Who gives a shit. If you don't pay for it, and you don't contribute code to it, you're a drone at best and should be ignored.

I write open source because I feel like it (an itch to scratch) and in hopes that other people will make software that I use better. If other people want to use it then that's cool but affects me not at all negatively or positively.

Sounds like David Gerard, JzG or Rodhullandemu, doesn't it?

I have never written Open Source software, don't have the time to do so, and since my former profession (one of them at least) is as a software developer, for which I got the paperwork at enormous personal expense (I paid my own way through a degree course), I'm disinclined to do it for free. Would you design and give an amp with a twin-EL34->twin-807 output stages with a THD of <0.01% and RMS output of 300W t someone for nothing, even if you loved them? Neither would I.

So, er, it doesn't sound like me at all.

[Vigilant]

Wikipedia's problems are not much different from the problems of the open-source software world.

A friend send me this link today. Typical story, unfortunately.

Who gives a shit. If you don't pay for it, and you don't contribute code to it, you're a drone at best and should be ignored.

I write open source because I feel like it (an itch to scratch) and in hopes that other people will make software that I use better. If other people want to use it then that's cool but affects me not at all negatively or positively.

Sounds like David Gerard, JzG or Rodhullandemu, doesn't it?

I have never written Open Source software, don't have the time to do so, and since my former profession (one of them at least) is as a software developer, for which I got the paperwork at enormous personal expense (I paid my own way through a degree course), I'm disinclined to do it for free. Would you design and give an amp with a twin-EL34->twin-807 output stages with a THD of <0.01% and RMS output of 300W t someone for nothing, even if you loved them? Neither would I.

So, er, it doesn't sound like me at all.

Dumb example.
Reuse of code is free.
Reuse of components has direct cost.

There exists a free IP core movement as well.

The fact that you believe what you state above does not surprise me.
You ARE the tragedy of the commons incarnate.