| |
|
  |
 New totally-Wikipedia site, Another modest website |
|
|
| Jumper |
 Thu 10th June 2010, 6:43pm
|
Neophyte
Group: Contributors
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri 4th Jun 2010, 3:34pm
Member No.: 21,165
|
My modest website http://morebestofwiki.blogspot.com/Suggestions for featured articles wanted (badly!) |
|
|
|
|
|
| thekohser |
Thu 10th June 2010, 7:44pm
|
Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Jumper |
Thu 10th June 2010, 8:54pm
|
Neophyte
Group: Contributors
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri 4th Jun 2010, 3:34pm
Member No.: 21,165
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Jumper |
Thu 10th June 2010, 9:05pm
|
Neophyte
Group: Contributors
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri 4th Jun 2010, 3:34pm
Member No.: 21,165
|
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] This post has been edited by Jumper: Thu 10th June 2010, 9:11pm |
|
|
|
|
|
| Jumper |
Fri 11th June 2010, 12:00am
|
Neophyte
Group: Contributors
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri 4th Jun 2010, 3:34pm
Member No.: 21,165
|
"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/This post has been edited by Jumper: Fri 11th June 2010, 1:27am |
|
|
|
|
|
| Jumper |
Fri 11th June 2010, 3:08pm
|
Neophyte
Group: Contributors
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri 4th Jun 2010, 3:34pm
Member No.: 21,165
|
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.
This post has been edited by Jumper: Fri 11th June 2010, 3:08pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kwork |
Fri 11th June 2010, 3:23pm
|
Senior Member
Group: Special Contributors
Posts: 405
Joined: Sat 23rd Jan 2010, 3:47pm
Member No.: 16,782
|
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...l_art#Norse_artAs 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. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Jumper |
Fri 11th June 2010, 4:36pm
|
Neophyte
Group: Contributors
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri 4th Jun 2010, 3:34pm
Member No.: 21,165
|
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!  |
|
|
|
|
|
| Kwork |
Fri 11th June 2010, 5:14pm
|
Senior Member
Group: Special Contributors
Posts: 405
Joined: Sat 23rd Jan 2010, 3:47pm
Member No.: 16,782
|
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! OK. Then how about fixing up the Neuticles article? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuticles |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |
