Wikipedia is currently a mess. Vandalism disguised as
"April Fool's Day" is out of control.
I hope you all have fun cleaning up this mess.
RickK
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com
/Raul's categorization of this as a disagreement
between a mob and a group of respected editors is wishful thinking. -- SJ
/A lie - I never anything of the sort. Please don't put words in my mouth. In fact, I think
Danny nailed it when he said the split in the community is between the people who think
the encyclopedia aspect comes first and those who think the social aspect comes first.
/Raul, you should have posted to this list about your decision about
the FA tomorrow: that is, to ignore the recent poll... -- SJ
/
I did one better than that, I posted my reasoning in a clearly marked section RIGHT BELOW THE POLL.
*And* my edit summary when I wrote the NES blurb was a link to the explanation. I did everything but
set up flashing neon signs pointing to it. But of course, you already knew all that, because you've
already responded to my comments there.
As far as ignoring the poll, this is yet another outright lie. I went with the 2nd highest rated poll
option (do nothing - e.g., a standard featured article) because, after asking everyone and his mother
for input (including the mailing list and Jimbo by name), I decided the first option did not meet the
one criteria of being the "daily featured article" - that is, it's not a featured article. And, the
article I did pick fulfilled Mav's secondary request that it be "fun". That's quite a lot of
attention to be paying to a poll I was ignoring.
Or, to put it another way -- the community was split with about 2/3's in favor of one option and
1/3 vociferously against it. Either way, one group was going to be pissed (at me). Jimbo's comments
weren't exactly decisive either, although they did push me in the serious-article direction.
Don't you just love no win situations?
/"it reflects the fact that Wikipedia EN is overpopulated by geeky teenagers who probably
prefer Red Bull to red wine and Game Boys to sex."/ --Viajero, aka Just Another Dinosaur
Hrmmm, where have I heard this before? Oh yes! This was the same rant that Xed always made (and
those of us who actually pay attention to what is happening on wikipedia - admittedly few on
this mailing list these days, as SJ's why-did't-you-post-it-here? comment shows - we remember
just how wonderful and friendly he was). But all the same, I'll be sure to pass along your
holier-than-thou sentiments to all the contributors who you've just insulted. I may not be the
"eminent worthiness" you label me as, but I'm sure the people you've stereotyped will appreciate your
comments just as much I did.
But on a more general note, this whole experience has left me thoroughly disgusted. The purpose of
this was to encourage people to write featured articles on quirky subjects. I said I'd go
with what the community decided, provided it met that tremendous, burdensome requirement of
being true. Silly me, what the hell was I thinking? An encyclopedia with true facts? Who ever heard
of such a thing? Of course, I do wonder - with all the time people have wasted bitching about how
terrible the process was, distorting facts and/or lying (SJ), and making personal attacks (Viajero),
just how many new featured articles could have been generated?
Just some food for thought...
--Mark
... is created by volunteers in their spare time (there are exceptions,
and some people get caught "doing it" at the workplace; however, we're
talking about the mainstream trend);
... offers full, free access to all of the information it stores to its
respective users, who can use it in any way they like, and even alter it
in any way they want (there usually are some peer-imposed limits, but
again, we're talking about the concept);
... has even its internal workings free to study, fix and enhance by
anybody who has the interest and time to;
... is able to store virtually unlimited amounts of data;
... is enhanced and refined each day in any direction;
... is inherently plagued by disputes and even wars -- and it can only
survive if it is able to negotiate these conflicts; however, each such
conflict makes it stronger and more able to negotiate such internal
conflicts in the future (unless it kills it, of course);
... stores accurate facts and erroneous opinions, useful insight and
useless trivia, exhaustive information in certain areas and sketchy data
about other domains -- however, the overall trend is towards fixing the
wrong data and filling in the missing information;
... needs minimal maintenance compared to its resources;
... has been able to maintain an active interest, and even fascination
for some, for a very long time;
... has intrinsic human and social value, since it stores information
collected by the mankind;
... is most probably the most wonderful, fascinating and open-ended
mechanism you'll ever see in this lifetime:
It's the human body.
(April Fool's :-))
Must say...
since I did not follow at all all the april fool discussion, when I
loggued in to irc this morning with eyes and brain still very sandy, it
took me a well 2 mn to connect and really understand why the channel was
renamed Britannica.
You got me here guys ! :-)
ant
If you've seen a wonderful new article this past month, which should
be more widely recognized, please submit it to the writing contest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:International_writing_contest
This contest is being held in parallel with the German, Japanese,
Dutch, and Ukranian wikipedias. Please contribute to this bit of
peaceful international collaboration :-)
Cheers,
SJ