Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ Wikipedia in Blogland _ New totally-Wikipedia site

Posted by: Jumper

My modest website
http://morebestofwiki.blogspot.com/
Suggestions for featured articles wanted (badly!)

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE
Jumper

* Gender: Male
* Industry: Engineering
* Location: In the Infosphere : United States

About Me

Artist, Director, Actor, Writer, Scientist. Once upon a time: Petroleum Exploration & Development, Forensic Parts Failure Analysis, Iron Making, Metal Heat Treating, Highway Department, Transformer Materials Research, Didgeridoo Player


Thanks, I've had enough.

Posted by: Moulton

Wait, maybe we could use a Digeridoo player for Wikipedia: The Musical.

Posted by: Emperor

Are those Google ads pulling in any money for you yet?

Posted by: Jumper

QUOTE(Emperor @ Thu 10th June 2010, 3:47pm) *

Are those Google ads pulling in any money for you yet?

Yes, I'm rich, rich, rich. Maybe $1/yr so far.

Posted by: Jumper

QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 10th June 2010, 3:47pm) *

Wait, maybe we could use a Digeridoo player for Wikipedia: The Musical.


I played the digeridoo in this number:
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZ54JVSLYFc/url]

Posted by: Alison

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 10th June 2010, 12:44pm) *

QUOTE
Jumper

* Gender: Male


Thanks. Horsie's had enough evilgrin.gif laugh.gif

Posted by: John Limey

QUOTE(Jumper @ Thu 10th June 2010, 7:43pm) *

My modest website
http://morebestofwiki.blogspot.com/
Suggestions for featured articles wanted (badly!)


Let me get this straight. All you do is post links to Wikipedia articles and then hope that somehow the ads on the side will make you rich beyond your wildest dreams? Or perhaps you're doing it just for the love of posting links? I'm sorry, I just don't understand.

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

QUOTE(John Limey @ Thu 10th June 2010, 9:48pm) *

Let me get this straight. All you do is post links to Wikipedia articles and then hope that somehow the ads on the side will make you rich beyond your wildest dreams? Or perhaps you're doing it just for the love of posting links? I'm sorry, I just don't understand.

I'm still trying to understand how the placement of Google ads is something worth paying anyone for.

Posted by: Moulton

QUOTE(John Limey @ Thu 10th June 2010, 5:48pm) *
I'm sorry, I just don't understand.

The sum of all human knowledge doesn't seem to be working.

Posted by: Jumper

"The sum of all human knowledge doesn't seem to be working."
Must not be.

I used to check out this site every day:
http://bestofwikipedia.tumblr.com/
but the author quit doing it.

Then another site similar started and then also stopped:
http://www.dailywiki.net/

Of course there's always "The Worst of Wikipedia"
http://citationneeded.tumblr.com/

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Thu 10th June 2010, 3:32pm) *

QUOTE(John Limey @ Thu 10th June 2010, 9:48pm) *

Let me get this straight. All you do is post links to Wikipedia articles and then hope that somehow the ads on the side will make you rich beyond your wildest dreams? Or perhaps you're doing it just for the love of posting links? I'm sorry, I just don't understand.

I'm still trying to understand how the placement of Google ads is something worth paying anyone for.

You don't understand how AdWords makes $20 billion a year?

Posted by: milowent

QUOTE(Jumper @ Thu 10th June 2010, 7:43pm) *

My modest website
http://morebestofwiki.blogspot.com/
Suggestions for featured articles wanted (badly!)


i shall dispense with the snark and proceed with the nominations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surra_de_Bunda

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_with_fraudulent_diplomas

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(milowent @ Fri 11th June 2010, 2:04am) *

QUOTE(Jumper @ Thu 10th June 2010, 7:43pm) *

My modest website
http://morebestofwiki.blogspot.com/
Suggestions for featured articles wanted (badly!)


i shall dispense with the snark and proceed with the nominations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surra_de_Bunda

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_with_fraudulent_diplomas


All right, all right... I nominate:

Wikipedia Review

and

Consumer economy

Posted by: carbuncle

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 11th June 2010, 10:56am) *

QUOTE(milowent @ Fri 11th June 2010, 2:04am) *

QUOTE(Jumper @ Thu 10th June 2010, 7:43pm) *

My modest website
http://morebestofwiki.blogspot.com/
Suggestions for featured articles wanted (badly!)


i shall dispense with the snark and proceed with the nominations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surra_de_Bunda

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_with_fraudulent_diplomas


All right, all right... I nominate:

Wikipedia Review

and

Consumer economy

And of course Cock and ball torture (sexual practice)!

Posted by: Jumper

Surra de Bunda

List of animals with fraudulent diplomas

Done! These are great. Thanks, milowent. (Let me know if you want your credit on the site changed or augmented or removed for some reason, or whatever.)

Also, it was pointed out to me I should have just mentioned the site in my user profile and not be a blogspammer. I wish I had done that.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(Jumper @ Thu 10th June 2010, 6:43pm) *

My modest website
http://morebestofwiki.blogspot.com/
Suggestions for featured articles wanted (badly!)


To write a good article it is necessary to have a good knowledge of the subject, which is gotten only by investing a lot of time and effort in study. Without that level of knowledge, anything written on a subject is guess work. For instance, of the articles on your list, the one that interest me is Vikings. In fact, because of my interest in knot patterns, I included quite few Viking (Norse) images in the image gallery here
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Knots_in_traditional_art#Norse_art

As you can see, there are sub-sections for Oseberg style, Borre style, Jelling style, etc. But, while classifying the images into the sub-sections, I realized I had a problem: I was dependent on the classification given with the image file. How do I know if the classification is correct? It could be wrong. In addition, I found some images that did not come with any information about the style they are classified in. How do I deal with those images? The only solution is to study the subject until I reach that point where I am sure I know what I am writing about. Until then I am left with the uneasy feeling that the information I have put into the gallery may be just more Wikipedia bullshit.

Posted by: Jumper

Kwork, my total approach to Wikipedia is 'caveat emptor.' If I see something and it's important to ascertain the real validity, I check out the talk pages first, and see what's happening there, and I always realize the whole experiment must be taken with a grain of salt.

If I put together such a good presentation as you, I would have noted some of the uncertainty about the provenances on the talk page and left it at that.

I wouldn't trust Wikipedia information so far as to invest money, write a thesis or paper, or bet my life on. Experience teaches me how much credence to give. As a guide to stuff I need to check out elsewhere, it serves pretty well. There's no shortage of valid criticism of Wiki and I give all that heavy credence also.

Since I impose such heavy caveats on myself, I assume others with sense do also, and that leaves me with fewer axes to grind. That doesn't stop me from editing some total bs articles, however! hrmph.gif


Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(Jumper @ Fri 11th June 2010, 4:36pm) *

Kwork, my total approach to Wikipedia is 'caveat emptor.' If I see something and it's important to ascertain the real validity, I check out the talk pages first, and see what's happening there, and I always realize the whole experiment must be taken with a grain of salt.

If I put together such a good presentation as you, I would have noted some of the uncertainty about the provenances on the talk page and left it at that.

I wouldn't trust Wikipedia information so far as to invest money, write a thesis or paper, or bet my life on. Experience teaches me how much credence to give. As a guide to stuff I need to check out elsewhere, it serves pretty well. There's no shortage of valid criticism of Wiki and I give all that heavy credence also.

Since I impose such heavy caveats on myself, I assume others with sense do also, and that leaves me with fewer axes to grind. That doesn't stop me from editing some total bs articles, however! hrmph.gif


OK. Then how about fixing up the Neuticles article? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuticles

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

QUOTE(Jumper @ Fri 11th June 2010, 3:08pm) *

Surra de Bunda

List of animals with fraudulent diplomas

Done! These are great. Thanks, milowent. (Let me know if you want your credit on the site changed or augmented or removed for some reason, or whatever.)

Felix Pedro

Sorry, what was the question?