The myth of reference sources Options

[thekohser]

A recent study proves what most of us here knew all along. For all of the hype about how Wikipedia is more and more reliable thanks to the reference sources that pepper its articles, when it comes right down to it, even college students are oblivious to what the references are actually pointing to when they evaluate the credibility of a Wikipedia article.

(Thankfully, as a paid editor, I can sometimes use this to my advantage... puffing out references that are barely relevant to what is claimed in the article. But if that's what it takes to make the content stick, so be it.)

(It's also a nifty trick to get vandalism to hold in place.)

This post has been edited by thekohser: Tue 7th June 2011, 3:30pm

[communicat]

A recent study proves what most of us here knew all along. For all of the hype about how Wikipedia is more and more reliable thanks to the reference sources that pepper its articles, when it comes right down to it, even college students are oblivious to what the references are actually pointing to when they evaluate the credibility of a Wikipedia article.

(Thankfully, as a paid editor, I can sometimes use this to my advantage... puffing out references that are barely relevant to what is claimed in the article. But if that's what it takes to make the content stick, so be it.)

(It's also a nifty trick to get vandalism to hold in place.)

You might find that the CC visual images influence text content credibility as much as or maybe even more so than the reference citations. If it was not for the State of Florida where WP's servers are located, and which is the only place in the world where CC licensed images have legal validity, I doubt if WP would be as seemingly credible as it is among some students.

[thekohser]

If it was not for the State of Florida where WP's servers are located, and which is the only place in the world where CC licensed images have legal validity...

I'm probably going to regret asking, but what in the world are you talking about there?

[communicat]

If it was not for the State of Florida where WP's servers are located, and which is the only place in the world where CC licensed images have legal validity...

I'm probably going to regret asking, but what in the world are you talking about there?

I'm saying a picture speaks a thousand words of credibility, more so than even copious references. WP probably wouldn't have come into existence were it not for its free access to countless CC visuals protected by a very liberal legal interpretation of copyright, courtesy State of Florida laws. Without those visuals (and those laws) a lot of WP articles would probably have no credibility at all, seeing as students apparently don't rely on quality of sourcing when it comes to judging credibility of an article.

This post has been edited by communicat: Tue 16th August 2011, 11:12pm

[thekohser]

If it was not for the State of Florida where WP's servers are located, and which is the only place in the world where CC licensed images have legal validity...

I'm probably going to regret asking, but what in the world are you talking about there?

I'm saying a picture speaks a thousand words of credibility, more so than even copious references. WP probably wouldn't have come into existence were it not for its free access to countless CC visuals protected by a very liberal legal interpretation of copyright, courtesy State of Florida laws. Without those visuals (and those laws) a lot of WP articles would probably have no credibility at all, seeing as students apparently don't rely on quality of sourcing when it comes to judging credibility of an article.

So, you're saying that Wikipedia would not have been protected in the 49 other states than Florida?

I think you have completely missed the reason why Wikipedia was set up in Florida -- two words, Brian Dowling.

I'm going to start dismissing a lot of what you say, "communicat", because you're just speaking your vague opinions as fact, without any basis in fact.

This post has been edited by thekohser: Wed 17th August 2011, 1:41pm

[communicat]

If it was not for the State of Florida where WP's servers are located, and which is the only place in the world where CC licensed images have legal validity...

I'm probably going to regret asking, but what in the world are you talking about there?

I'm saying a picture speaks a thousand words of credibility, more so than even copious references. WP probably wouldn't have come into existence were it not for its free access to countless CC visuals protected by a very liberal legal interpretation of copyright, courtesy State of Florida laws. Without those visuals (and those laws) a lot of WP articles would probably have no credibility at all, seeing as students apparently don't rely on quality of sourcing when it comes to judging credibility of an article.

So, you're saying that Wikipedia would not have been protected in the 49 other states than Florida?

I think you have completely missed the reason why Wikipedia was set up in Florida -- two words, Brian Dowling.

I'm going to start dismissing a lot of what you say, "communicat", because you're just speaking your vague opinions as fact, without any basis in fact.

I'm saying that, in my limited understanding, WP/WMF is unlikely to be sued for financial compensation in places where it does not have any assets worth seizing if it fails to pay up. Or maybe civil laws work differently in the US. I don't know. Maybe you can enlighten me? Does WP/WMF have assets anywhere other than in Florida?

This post has been edited by communicat: Wed 17th August 2011, 3:34pm

[thekohser]

I'm saying that, in my limited understanding, WP/WMF is unlikely to be sued for financial compensation in places where it does not have any assets worth seizing if it fails to pay up. Or maybe civil laws work differently in the US. I don't know. Maybe you can enlighten me? Does WP/WMF have assets anywhere other than in Florida?

You are also the same person who stated fairly clearly as "fact":

If it was not for the State of Florida where WP's servers are located, and which is the only place in the world where CC licensed images have legal validity...

I sensed that you were talking out of your ass, and it would appear that I was correct, as you now express "limited understanding", and "don't know", and request to be "enlightened".

I'm not sure how others feel here, but I really feel like my time is wasted when people post matters of what appear to be "fact", when in actual fact, it's nothing more than erroneous conjecture or imagination. Please don't do that.

[communicat]

I'm saying that, in my limited understanding, WP/WMF is unlikely to be sued for financial compensation in places where it does not have any assets worth seizing if it fails to pay up. Or maybe civil laws work differently in the US. I don't know. Maybe you can enlighten me? Does WP/WMF have assets anywhere other than in Florida?

You are also the same person who stated fairly clearly as "fact":

If it was not for the State of Florida where WP's servers are located, and which is the only place in the world where CC licensed images have legal validity...

I sensed that you were talking out of your ass, and it would appear that I was correct, as you now express "limited understanding", and "don't know", and request to be "enlightened".

I'm not sure how others feel here, but I really feel like my time is wasted when people post matters of what appear to be "fact", when in actual fact, it's nothing more than erroneous conjecture or imagination. Please don't do that.

What a rude feller you are in fact. But never mind; I can appreciate the annoyance here of someone who, by his/her own admission is a paid editor. Not good for business to be seen biting the hand the feeds you, hey?

Meanwhile, yes, my small and inadvertent mistake: Florida is not the only place in the world that recognises the validity of CC lisencing. The Netherlands apparently recognises CC validity as well. Nowhere else, to the best of my present knowledge, has the validity of CC lisencing ever been legally acknowledged, not even in the rest of the US excepting Florida. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Nobody's perfect.

This post has been edited by communicat: Wed 17th August 2011, 7:33pm

[Vigilant]

I'm saying that, in my limited understanding, WP/WMF is unlikely to be sued for financial compensation in places where it does not have any assets worth seizing if it fails to pay up. Or maybe civil laws work differently in the US. I don't know. Maybe you can enlighten me? Does WP/WMF have assets anywhere other than in Florida?

You are also the same person who stated fairly clearly as "fact":

If it was not for the State of Florida where WP's servers are located, and which is the only place in the world where CC licensed images have legal validity...

I sensed that you were talking out of your ass, and it would appear that I was correct, as you now express "limited understanding", and "don't know", and request to be "enlightened".

I'm not sure how others feel here, but I really feel like my time is wasted when people post matters of what appear to be "fact", when in actual fact, it's nothing more than erroneous conjecture or imagination. Please don't do that.

What a rude feller you are in fact. But never mind; I can appreciate the annoyance here of someone who, by his/her own admission is a paid editor. Not good for business to be seen biting the hand the feeds you, hey?

Meanwhile, yes, my small and inadvertent mistake: Florida is not the only place in the world that recognises the validity of CC lisencing. The Netherlands apparently recognises CC validity as well. Nowhere else, to the best of my present knowledge, has the validity of CC lisencing ever been legally acknowledged, not even in the rest of the US excepting Florida. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Nobody's perfect.

Do you work at being this wrong or is it a gift?

[communicat]

I'm saying that, in my limited understanding, WP/WMF is unlikely to be sued for financial compensation in places where it does not have any assets worth seizing if it fails to pay up. Or maybe civil laws work differently in the US. I don't know. Maybe you can enlighten me? Does WP/WMF have assets anywhere other than in Florida?

You are also the same person who stated fairly clearly as "fact":

If it was not for the State of Florida where WP's servers are located, and which is the only place in the world where CC licensed images have legal validity...

I sensed that you were talking out of your ass, and it would appear that I was correct, as you now express "limited understanding", and "don't know", and request to be "enlightened".

I'm not sure how others feel here, but I really feel like my time is wasted when people post matters of what appear to be "fact", when in actual fact, it's nothing more than erroneous conjecture or imagination. Please don't do that.

What a rude feller you are in fact. But never mind; I can appreciate the annoyance here of someone who, by his/her own admission is a paid editor. Not good for business to be seen biting the hand the feeds you, hey?

Meanwhile, yes, my small and inadvertent mistake: Florida is not the only place in the world that recognises the validity of CC lisencing. The Netherlands apparently recognises CC validity as well. Nowhere else, to the best of my present knowledge, has the validity of CC lisencing ever been legally acknowledged, not even in the rest of the US excepting Florida. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Nobody's perfect.

Do you work at being this wrong or is it a gift?

My apologies. I didn't realise WR was meant to be a Compendium of Fact. I thought instead (and maybe misguidedly) that WR was meant to be a forum for critical discourse through an exchange of views, experiences and opinions. I've expressed mine; you've expressed yours. I prefer mine. Get over it. If you want to censor or suppress alternative viewpoints that deviate from your own and from the mainstream norm, go work fulltime at WP. Others do.

This post has been edited by communicat: Thu 18th August 2011, 3:22pm

[Vigilant]

I'm saying that, in my limited understanding, WP/WMF is unlikely to be sued for financial compensation in places where it does not have any assets worth seizing if it fails to pay up. Or maybe civil laws work differently in the US. I don't know. Maybe you can enlighten me? Does WP/WMF have assets anywhere other than in Florida?

You are also the same person who stated fairly clearly as "fact":

If it was not for the State of Florida where WP's servers are located, and which is the only place in the world where CC licensed images have legal validity...

I sensed that you were talking out of your ass, and it would appear that I was correct, as you now express "limited understanding", and "don't know", and request to be "enlightened".

I'm not sure how others feel here, but I really feel like my time is wasted when people post matters of what appear to be "fact", when in actual fact, it's nothing more than erroneous conjecture or imagination. Please don't do that.

What a rude feller you are in fact. But never mind; I can appreciate the annoyance here of someone who, by his/her own admission is a paid editor. Not good for business to be seen biting the hand the feeds you, hey?

Meanwhile, yes, my small and inadvertent mistake: Florida is not the only place in the world that recognises the validity of CC lisencing. The Netherlands apparently recognises CC validity as well. Nowhere else, to the best of my present knowledge, has the validity of CC lisencing ever been legally acknowledged, not even in the rest of the US excepting Florida. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Nobody's perfect.

Do you work at being this wrong or is it a gift?

My apologies. I didn't realise WR was meant to be a Compendium of Fact. I thought instead (and maybe misguidedly) that WR was meant to be a forum for critical discourse through an exchange of views, experiences and opinions. I've expressed mine; you've expressed yours. I prefer mine. Get over it. If you want to censor or suppress alternative viewpoints that deviate from your own and from the mainstream norm, go work fulltime at WP. Others do.

No.
I haven't expressed my opinion on this topic yet. I have only stated that yours is wrong.

You, obviously, have no idea how copyright works and your continued thrashing about like a poorly constructed robot shedding pieces of badly machines parts around the living room is off putting.

Please stop.

[communicat]

I'm saying that, in my limited understanding, WP/WMF is unlikely to be sued for financial compensation in places where it does not have any assets worth seizing if it fails to pay up. Or maybe civil laws work differently in the US. I don't know. Maybe you can enlighten me? Does WP/WMF have assets anywhere other than in Florida?

You are also the same person who stated fairly clearly as "fact":

If it was not for the State of Florida where WP's servers are located, and which is the only place in the world where CC licensed images have legal validity...

I sensed that you were talking out of your ass, and it would appear that I was correct, as you now express "limited understanding", and "don't know", and request to be "enlightened".

I'm not sure how others feel here, but I really feel like my time is wasted when people post matters of what appear to be "fact", when in actual fact, it's nothing more than erroneous conjecture or imagination. Please don't do that.

What a rude feller you are in fact. But never mind; I can appreciate the annoyance here of someone who, by his/her own admission is a paid editor. Not good for business to be seen biting the hand the feeds you, hey?

Meanwhile, yes, my small and inadvertent mistake: Florida is not the only place in the world that recognises the validity of CC lisencing. The Netherlands apparently recognises CC validity as well. Nowhere else, to the best of my present knowledge, has the validity of CC lisencing ever been legally acknowledged, not even in the rest of the US excepting Florida. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Nobody's perfect.

Do you work at being this wrong or is it a gift?

My apologies. I didn't realise WR was meant to be a Compendium of Fact. I thought instead (and maybe misguidedly) that WR was meant to be a forum for critical discourse through an exchange of views, experiences and opinions. I've expressed mine; you've expressed yours. I prefer mine. Get over it. If you want to censor or suppress alternative viewpoints that deviate from your own and from the mainstream norm, go work fulltime at WP. Others do.

No.
I haven't expressed my opinion on this topic yet. I have only stated that yours is wrong.

You, obviously, have no idea how copyright works and your continued thrashing about like a poorly constructed robot shedding pieces of badly machines parts around the living room is off putting.

Please stop.

Sure, I have no idea how copyright works in every one of the world's 192 countries, each with its own separate copyright laws. But I do have some idea of the fact that laws of Florida, for example, cannot be imposed legitimately on the rest of the world. Not even the American Wikipedia can pull that off.

[Milton Roe]

Sure, I have no idea how copyright works in every one of the world's 192 countries, each with its own separate copyright laws. But I do have some idea of the fact that laws of Florida, for example, cannot be imposed legitimately on the rest of the world. Not even the American Wikipedia can pull that off.

The laws of Florida have nothing to do with copyright. Copyright is extended by law in the US by federal code, specifically the Copyright Act of 1976. The states cannot add or subtract from federal code, which supercedes all state and local laws when it comes to intellectual property (per the constitution, which makes copyright and patent federal issues).

About all the states can do is add statues that complement code. For example, those that implement antipiracy laws, like making videorecorders illegal in movie theaters. However, film piracy methods are not really copyright issues per se, but rather have to do with the technical details (the videocam things are sort of like "paraphenalia laws").

So, what the devil are you talking about?

[communicat]

Sure, I have no idea how copyright works in every one of the world's 192 countries, each with its own separate copyright laws. But I do have some idea of the fact that laws of Florida, for example, cannot be imposed legitimately on the rest of the world. Not even the American Wikipedia can pull that off.

The laws of Florida have nothing to do with copyright. Copyright is extended by law in the US by federal code, specifically the Copyright Act of 1976. The states cannot add or subtract from federal code, which supercedes all state and local laws when it comes to intellectual property (per the constitution, which makes copyright and patent federal issues).

About all the states can do is add statues that complement code. For example, those that implement antipiracy laws, like making videorecorders illegal in movie theaters. However, film piracy methods are not really copyright issues per se, but rather have to do with the technical details (the videocam things are sort of like "paraphenalia laws").

So, what the devil are you talking about?

My confusion arose basically from the wikipedia entry on wikipedia, which states that content in WP is governed by laws of Florida, "especially copyright law". The entry then goes into a spiel about CC-BY-SA, leading the casual reader to believe the two things are closely interwoven. Serves me right for relying on WP for edification. Thanks to those in this thread who've now clarified the issue for me, to some extent at any rate.

[thekohser]

My confusion arose basically from the wikipedia entry on ...

I think we just learned quite a lot about you, "communicat".