The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Officious Prick-ipediA
thekohser
post Mon 1st March 2010, 5:48pm
Post #1


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



I'm getting some link traffic from The Gameroom Blitz, where they seem to have a full-blown hate-on for Jimmy Wales:

QUOTE
These games are better than any of the official versions of GORF I've played... isn't that worthy of some mention? Not according to skirt-chasing douchenozzle Jimmy Wales and his army of anal-retentive dweebs with delusions of alpha maledom. A note to Jimmy if he's reading this, and I do so hope he is... what's the point of an encyclopedia that anyone can edit if you're just going to edit it out?


Another satisfied Wikipedia customer!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dtobias
post Mon 1st March 2010, 7:19pm
Post #2


Obsessive trolling idiot [per JzG]
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,213
Joined: Sun 11th Feb 2007, 2:45pm
From: Boca Raton, FL, USA
Member No.: 962

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Some of these criticisms you linked aren't all that fair; they're taking Wikipedia to task for insisting on better sources for things that people tried to write about based on their own personal knowledge of the subjects involved; but if somebody managed to get a hoax into Wikipedia by claiming personal knowledge of something that was in fact false, and even worse, pertained to a BLP subject, then the WR crowd would be the first to be screaming bloody murder about how Wikipedia was spreading bad information, and maybe even defamation. It's a no-win situation for the admins who get put into "damned if I do, damned if I don't" situations every time they are confronted with a "keep or delete" choice.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GlassBeadGame
post Mon 1st March 2010, 7:37pm
Post #3


Dharma Bum
*********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 7,919
Joined: Sat 17th Feb 2007, 12:55am
From: My name it means nothing. My age it means less. The country I come from is called the Mid-West.
Member No.: 981



QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 1st March 2010, 2:19pm) *

Some of these criticisms you linked aren't all that fair; they're taking Wikipedia to task for insisting on better sources for things that people tried to write about based on their own personal knowledge of the subjects involved; but if somebody managed to get a hoax into Wikipedia by claiming personal knowledge of something that was in fact false, and even worse, pertained to a BLP subject, then the WR crowd would be the first to be screaming bloody murder about how Wikipedia was spreading bad information, and maybe even defamation. It's a no-win situation for the admins who get put into "damned if I do, damned if I don't" situations every time they are confronted with a "keep or delete" choice.


Of course the arguments are not very good. It would not be a better encyclopedia if that group of Usenet dweebs ran it instead of the current group of Usenet dweebs. But the officious prick part is right on the money.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st 5 13, 8:28am