Originally posted by CoconutAm i the only one that thinks its stupid and selfish to try to sabotage articles on wikipedia..
You could work on this one too
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivanhoe
Sticking junk like that into articles just ruins it for the rest of us..
Its free, i use it numerous times in a day, why not contribute rather than pollute it.
Originally posted by dk3nnyI generally agree, although part of the point of this exercise was a test of Wikipedia's validity. While I love the idea, we should remember that published reference sources have many built-in obstacles to publication, so the integrity of the information is more assured. In WP (Wikipedia, not Wolfpack), you just saw that any random tw@t with an internet connection can affect the articles you read.
Am i the only one that thinks its stupid and selfish to try to sabotage articles on wikipedia..
Sticking junk like that into articles just ruins it for the rest of us..
Its free, i use it numerous times in a day, why not contribute rather than pollute it.
However, it was edited quickly, and obviously WP has a highly developed immune system. I wonder how long before a Wiki community becomes a more stringent (and consequently reliable) publisher than a publisher is.
Originally posted by royalchickenMaybe if you had stated at the start of the thread that you were testing wikipedias information integretity i would have more cause to believe the last post..
I generally agree, although part of the point of this exercise was a test of Wikipedia's validity. While I love the idea, we should remember that published reference sources have many built-in obstacles to publication, so the integrity of the information is more assured. In WP (Wikipedia, not Wolfpack), you just saw that any random tw@t with an inte ...[text shortened]... ki community becomes a more stringent (and consequently reliable) publisher than a publisher is.
Looks more like you were looking to graffiti a public resource and boast about it..
Not to worry anyway, like we saw, they obviously have quite a hard working mod team/
Originally posted by dk3nnyBeh, mod team. If I had put in a citation of my contribution, linking to the numerous instances on the RHP boards of such an Ivanhovian refusal, then what I wrote would have been both correct (even more certainly correct than much else on Wikipedia, since I will have had a primary source) and relevant (since it was about Wolfpacks). Therefore, the 'mod team' are really a bunch of experienced users exercising power arbitrarily -- a coup d'etat against the democracy of information that WP and WP both support.
Maybe if you had stated at the start of the thread that you were testing wikipedias information integretity i would have more cause to believe the last post..
Looks more like you were looking to graffiti a public resource and boast about it..
Not to worry anyway, like we saw, they obviously have quite a hard working mod team/
😛
Originally posted by royalchickenPerhaps the RHP Wolfpack requires it's own dedicated page (a la Flying Spaghetti Monster). We could include the history of Forum Wars, ivanhoe, the secrecy of its members, links to specificly related posts and a general overvie of the RHP forums.
Beh, mod team. If I had put in a citation of my contribution, linking to the numerous instances on the RHP boards of such an Ivanhovian refusal, then what I wrote would have been both correct (even more certainly correct than much else on Wikipedia, since I will have had a primary source) and relevant (since it was about Wolfpacks). Therefore, the 'm ...[text shortened]... rarily -- a coup d'etat against the democracy of information that WP and WP both support.
😛
Originally posted by royalchickenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vanity_guidelines
Beh, mod team. If I had put in a citation of my contribution, linking to the numerous instances on the RHP boards of such an Ivanhovian refusal, then what I wrote would have been both correct (even more certainly correct than much else on Wikipedia, since I will have had a primary source) and relevant (since it was about Wolfpacks). Therefore, the 'm ...[text shortened]... rarily -- a coup d'etat against the democracy of information that WP and WP both support.
😛
1 edit
Originally posted by StarrmanI like this idea. Acolyte (btw Colin, if you still lurk, get back here and solve some of my Posers and Puzzles!) once asked if RHP needed a Wikipedia entry. We could write an article on the Pack, and request and article on RHP so that we could put maroon links where necessary. Maybe dk3nny can write the Pack(canine) disambiguation page.
Perhaps the RHP Wolfpack requires it's own dedicated page (a la Flying Spaghetti Monster). We could include the history of Forum Wars, ivanhoe, the secrecy of its members, links to specificly related posts and a general overvie of the RHP forums.
Actually, I'm willing to help write such a history in the next few weeks, if Dr. S archived Forumwars and Russ archived the Forum Issues Forum.
Originally posted by royalchickenI too would be in on this, I'm sure Russ archived the forum issues forum, not so sure about ForumWars though, it may be a case of re-telling the life of it to spread the message. Sort of like the gospel according to Marianne Dent.
I like this idea. Acolyte (btw Colin, if you still lurk, get back here and solve some of my Posers and Puzzles!) once asked if RHP needed a Wikipedia entry. We could write an article on the Pack, and request and article on RHP so that we could put maroon links where necessary. Maybe dk3nny can write the Pack(canine) disambiguation page.
Actually, ...[text shortened]... ory in the next few weeks, if Dr. S archived Forumwars and Russ archived the Forum Issues Forum.