INTERVIEW: Wikipedia still needs improvements, says founder - Monsters and Critics.com, Same Jimmy, different sucker Options

[Newsfeed]

<img alt="" height="1" width="1" />INTERVIEW: [b]Wikipedia still needs improvements, says founder[/b]
Monsters and Critics.com
Haifa, Israel - Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has defended the website's choice of venue for its annual conference, its reliability and quality. In an interview with the German Press Agency dpa, Wales rejected ...

and more »

View the article

[communicat]

<img alt="" height="1" width="1" />INTERVIEW: [b]Wikipedia still needs improvements, says founder[/b]
Monsters and Critics.com
Haifa, Israel - Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has defended the website's choice of venue for its annual conference, its reliability and quality. In an interview with the German Press Agency dpa, Wales rejected ...

and more »

View the article

Re Jimbo's: "our view is free knowledge for everyone. We are non-political." He must be joking. See topic Wikipedia and Censorship currently at General Discussion page.

[EricBarbour]

Don't worry about Wales. When I put out my report about his "encyclopedia",
he'll need to wear a hat---to keep steam from exploding out of his fat little head.

Did you know that the average en-WP article is less than 4k bytes long,
contains only 2 references, and is basically useless? And that the top 10
Wikipedia editors by quantity have been doing nothing but use bots to
make pointless edits to userpages and other non-encyclopedia locations--
for more than 2 years? And that the actual addition of useful information
to articles peaked out in 2008-2009, and is now slowly dropping? Meanwhile,
admins are blocking 16,000 users every month--mostly by using bots.

That "project" is slowly going to hell.

[communicat]

Don't worry about Wales. When I put out my report about his "encyclopedia",
he'll need to wear a hat---to keep steam from exploding out of his fat little head.

Did you know that the average en-WP article is less than 4k bytes long,
contains only 2 references, and is basically useless? And that the top 10
Wikipedia editors by quantity have been doing nothing but use bots to
make pointless edits to userpages and other non-encyclopedia locations--
for more than 2 years? And that the actual addition of useful information
to articles peaked out in 2008-2009, and is now slowly dropping? Meanwhile,
admins are blocking 16,000 users every month--mostly by using bots.

That "project" is slowly going to hell.

For a further good analysis of wikipedia methodology, have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ed_Fitzgerald/thoughts

Also some insightful current comments at http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/08/05/16..._medium=twitter

This post has been edited by communicat: Sun 7th August 2011, 3:57pm