[WikiEN-l] Online Newspapers Considering Subscription Model

[Bod Notbod]

On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 1:31 AM, <wjhonson at aol.com> wrote:

> It's a tiny bit highbrow, so I wouldn't expect really that much of it.

Agreed. The average vandal doesn't look at policy. They simply look at
a page and want to mess with it in some way. Oftentimes it's just
writing their name or swearing. I'm telling you stuff you already
know...

> Real references, exist already online with the advent of google but
> more importantly perhaps Google Books.  If you are the sole person to
> have ever referenced item ABC it's very likely that item ABC does not
> actually exist.

And if it's not in worldcat.org. As you say.

Yeah, fair enough.

I think it's just that sometimes I think "what would I do if I really
wanted to fuck with Wikipedia?"

But I've been with the project for 4 years or more. And someone that
just wants to make mischief is hardly going to want to spend 4
researching how to piss off an important project. And *even* *if*
*they* did*... I guess there would be that *one* *wrong* *move* that
would lead to *all* of their previous edits being examined.

I think I'm just being overprotective and paranoid. I am a paranoid
person: I even have a prescription. Seriously, alas. I care about
Wikipedia. Huggle shows me all the time how people piss about with it.
But I have little to no indication that anyone's buggering about with
references. And in all my years of working on WP I've only bumped into
one user that went to ArbCom (and got soundly castigated).

Thinking about my experiences patrolling Recent Changes most changes
are made to current figures. It's never "Physics" or "Plato" it will
tend to be about a local High School or a current rapper or sports
team.

I shall try to sleep soundly tonight.