Marc Riddell wrote:
on 7/27/07 12:27 PM, Bryan Derksen at bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
It's not constant, it's only been for the past couple of days.
Criticism of other sites has been occurring only in the past couple of days!?! I must be reading a different List from you.
This thread only goes back to the 24th. That's three days by my watch.
And it's not "Wikipedia" that's doing the criticizing, since that would run afoul of NPOV, it's just a couple of Wikipedians. So the real question is "should some Wikipedians occasionally criticize other sites?"
And I am speaking to that "couple (?) of Wikipedians" when I say we should spend our time and energy focusing on growing and improving our own site. Anything else in minor league.
If you're speaking to those Wikipedians then say that you're speaking to those Wikipedians. The point of my previous post was that you were asking an incorrect question.
Sometimes criticism is valuable, and sometimes it is deserved.
And, sometimes, it is just childish.
Sure. But _is_ it this time? You didn't make any sort of case.
Heck, we've got a list somewhere on Wikipedia itself (in the Wikipedia namespace mind you) where we keep a big list of errors Britannica has made that Wikipedia has corrected.
An amateur waste of space.
In Your Opinion. In my opinion, all other potential uses aside, a list like this is good for making sure common misconceptions don't slip back into articles. People write articles based on information in Britannica sometimes.
How about that Nature study a while back that identified a bunch of errors in Wikipedia articles? We corrected all of them in short order. Also a waste of space?