| Author |
|
Jacob P Secrest
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 18 October 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4068
|
| Posted: 17 January 2007 at 3:02pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Trevor Krysak wrote:
Alex Trebek is a deity! He is the god of Jeopardy. He giveth and taketh
away. Be sure to speak to him in the proper manner though. Always in the
form of a question. |
|
|
To put this into reference, I made a post that mentioned that Alex Trebek
was listed as a deity for like two weeks on Wikipedia, it was deleted for
having a link to Wikipedia.
I have a friend who credited himself as the inventor of the Gnome, that
stayed up for a while as well.
It's really a completely unreliable place.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Rey Madrinan
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 August 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 865
|
| Posted: 17 January 2007 at 4:18pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Wikipedia is great for finding out about most pop-culture stuff, tv shows, fictional characters and stuff like that.
Historical information? Na' so much.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Trevor Krysak
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 4163
|
| Posted: 17 January 2007 at 4:23pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
I kinda wish you hadn't clarified things, Jacob. I kinda like the notion of people coming to this thread and inexplicably seeing me champion Alex Trebek's status as a deity.
Which he is. Do not doubt that.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Chris Hutton
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 11667
|
| Posted: 17 January 2007 at 6:26pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
bullshit! Sajak is our Dark Lord and Master!!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Jacob P Secrest
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 18 October 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4068
|
| Posted: 17 January 2007 at 7:41pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Trevor, I thought about that, but I felt it would be best to just limit
confusion.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Andrew Hess
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9846
|
| Posted: 17 January 2007 at 10:20pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
I work with editors that reference Wikipedia all the time. When I point out how dubious it is, and why, they roll their eyes.
So, soon, I can tell you there will be books that are researched using Wikipedia. And unfortunately, I'm sure there have been others.
Sorry; I've done what I can.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Chris Hutton
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 11667
|
| Posted: 17 January 2007 at 10:25pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Yeah, I have a feeling that battle was lost before it started. People take that shit like it's gospel.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Raphael Soohoo
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 January 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: 17 January 2007 at 10:58pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
It's just indicative of our society... we like convenience, Wikipedia is convenient for referencing. Forget the fact that there are random editors who sometimes put their bias or wrong information within it. Relying on Wikipedia for facts isn't the smartest thing to do.
Edited by Raphael Soohoo on 18 January 2007 at 3:11pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Paulo Pereira
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 April 2006
Posts: 15539
|
| Posted: 18 January 2007 at 9:42pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
It does post external links, at least usually.
Edited by Paulo Pereira on 18 January 2007 at 9:44pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Francesco Vanagolli
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 03 June 2005
Location: Italy
Posts: 3130
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 2:32am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Wikipedia offended He-Man! I'll never use that site!
(very funny, Craig!)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Michael Casselman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 January 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1256
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 10:00am | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
As a quick reference, it's okay, but nothing that should be used a primary, indepth research. Most articles I've seen tend to emphasize notation of source information.
Those who choose to deliberately troll Wikipedia should be flogged. Going in and changing (vandalizing) an entry just to say "see... it's unreliable" are just as bad as people who create viruses and program hacks just so they can brag that they found a hole in a computer program (or otherwise want to create mischief). it's counterproductive and gives the endeavor an overall bad rep.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133673
|
| Posted: 19 January 2007 at 10:47am | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
Those who choose to deliberately troll Wikipedia should be flogged. Going in and changing (vandalizing) an entry just to say "see... it's unreliable" are just as bad as people who create viruses and program hacks just so they can brag that they found a hole in a computer program (or otherwise want to create mischief). it's counterproductive and gives the endeavor an overall bad rep.*** How about those who "go in" and vandalize an entry in order to slander the individual about whom the entry is written? To deliberately spread false information, knowing far too many who use Wikipedia will never cross check, and will accept whatever they read there as fact. Those kinds of vandals seem to far outnumber the ones who alter entries just to prove that it can be done.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |