QUOTE(taiwopanfob @ Sat 27th March 2010, 9:00pm)
QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Sun 28th March 2010, 3:51am)
So the project can't correct "amateurish vandalism" in a timely manner?
QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Sat 27th March 2010, 9:02pm)
obviously not for articles like this one. no one argues that schoolboy vandalism is always quickly removed on obscure articles
One of the distinguishing characteristics of an encyclopedia
is comparative accuracy on obscure topics. This is one of many tests that Wikipedia does not meet.
I know of several editors who enjoy this type of harmless "breaching experiment", what one might call "bad geography". It hurts no one to insert in the article on, for example, Chacachacare (T-H-L-K-D)
(an obscure island in Trinidad), some random factoid about a ghost ship or mythological belief. The better ones (which I won't reveal here) are sourced with excellent-looking fake sources, something trivial to do on Wikipedia (and anywhere without serious peer review or -- say -- ethics
So it's a shame this one was caught. I love to add them to my list, it's like bird-watching for wild snipe. But not "schoolboy" at all, I'm afraid. It's a sentinel for far worse things.