On Wed, 2002-11-06 at 19:00, daniwo59(a)aol.com wrote:
I've been going back and forth on this
Minoa/Minoan civilization thing with
Lir. Obviously, she is wrong. I have consulted with several people, including
a respected archeologist, though I don't know why I bother. She seems intent
on bringing a mad array of proofs, almost all of them web-based, including
computer games (though she is now excited that she found a proof in the Book
of Mormon). I can go back and forth in an edit war, but frankly, I've got a
lot better things to do. Nor is this the first time she has inserted
questionable information: Columbus and Iowa State are two examples. Frankly,
it's frustrating, especially when I actually go to the trouble to research
the subject. It seems like a huge waste of time, but I don't want to see
Wikipedia transformed into a joke either or have baseless "facts" empowered
just because of a user's bullying. Any suggestions?
I recommend either adding in the new information you've learned (which
is why we bother--learning is fun), making a copy of the article and
adding the new information to that copy (make a page in the User space
or on Meta), and/or sticking the article on your watchlist and waiting a
week. Then put in the article you think is right. Do this once a week.
Or once a month.
Actually, that's not the most effective technique of dealing with the
issue, but the above methods take minimal effort.
Just don't let yourself get upset.
--tc