General > Discussion
Seven Day Roguelike entry up for deletion in Wikipedia
Zeb:
--- Quote from: Rabiat on July 13, 2007, 04:40 ---Wikipedians don't take too kindly to meatpuppets. ;)
--- End quote ---
Thanks for the heads up, I forgot about WP:MEAT. >_<
I tried looking through that "A Man In Bl?ck " guy's edit history, I find it interesting that almost nothing he's done in his last 500 edits meets WP:N. I thought about pointing that out, but it's not all that relevant and pointing out the hypocrisies an Admin is a pretty bad idea (as I learned in the Encyclopedia Dramatica debacle) Meanwhile, I plan to keep arguing. Deleting the 7DRL article seems absolutely silly to me.
DisaffectedBeta:
Cheers then, DaEezT. I was probably defensive because I felt I could have written it better.
You're right not to do that, Rabiat. Ad hominem attacks don't go anywhere on a reasonable forum. Sticking to the issue is best, even when the admin is playing inquisitor.
I've avoided taking up an account many times with wikipedia because I felt like it was a wasted effort. The misattributed or misstated quotes are the ones that really get to me, because that just illustrates sloppy research, but I felt that if anyone wanted to really look up information on a topic, they might, at best, use the dread Wiki as a stepping stone to actually learning about something, as I usually do, instead of treating it as the final step. Unfortunately, though, we tend not to have time to do full research on a given topic, and human beings are rumor-animals at times, making something that SOUNDS like knowledge become knowledge. Even when you find out later that a fact you'd heard through the grapevine is false, it's hard to dislodge it from the brain.
I think editorial authority is something too important to ever be phased out, which is why I can't take wiki as seriously as I think its founders would like it to be taken, although I admit I use it quite a bit.
Rabiat:
--- Quote from: DisaffectedBeta ---This nitpicking seems strangely inefficient.
--- End quote ---
Just think about the amount of effort and frustration that goes into writing, revising, criticizing and debating these articles. Most of it is simply lost. "Goofy" is the right word. :)
--- Quote from: Zeb ---Thanks for the heads up, I forgot about WP:MEAT. >_<
--- End quote ---
These Wikipedia acronyms are ironically funny. And at times their lingo is hilarious.
You seem to be holding your own just fine in that mess though. :)
--- Quote from: DisaffectedBeta ---I think editorial authority is something too important to ever be phased out, which is why I can't take wiki as seriously as I think its founders would like it to be taken, although I admit I use it quite a bit.
--- End quote ---
Actually Wikipedia is a very valuable source of information about subjects you don't know that much about. What I find disturbing about Wikipedia is that new contributors are often scared away by some self-appointed authorities, who don't necessarily know anything about the subject, but nevertheless don't hesitate to subject new users to arbitrary rules or formalities: "this is not a suitable subject for Wikipedia because WP:N, WP:POV, WP:A-to-D and WP:XYZZY, so it's got to go. Bye."
DisaffectedBeta:
They are drunk... on WIKI POWER!!
Zeb:
Not related to this topic, but one thing I noticed about Wikipedia is that a lot of people complain (rightly so) about everyone doing pointless articles instead of important ones. I think the reason for this is that every time you try to edit an article with any actual encyclopedic value, it gets reverted by anti-vandals and you have to spend a week in a ****ing internet war just to get your two sentences added. It's waaaaaaaaaay more trouble than it's worth for the contributor. For example, a few months ago I tried adding a paragraph to the "balloon" article about hazards to marine mammals. It sparked a massive edit war that went on for weeks involving about 20 people (~10 to each side) and eventually was solved (I thought) by an admin that let my paragraph stay. I just checked the article though, and my paragraph is gone now. THAT, I think, is inefficiency at it most...uh, inefficient.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version