On 4/23/07, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Gary Kirk [mailto:gary.kirk@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 01:25 PM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] "Wicked-pedia" in today's Daily Mail
So really, why write a story about it in <s>newspaper</s> the Daily Mail? A friend vandalises my userpage. Do I use this as a stage to attack him? No. I move on.
And Jerry Sanger, I ask you... ;-)
On 23/04/07, Tony Sidaway tonysidaway@gmail.com wrote:
On 4/23/07, Mak makwik@gmail.com wrote:
Here's the url
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=...
Quite a well written, amusing little piece, not at all the hack job I'd been led to expect. Petronella Wyatt was apparently vandalised by the insertion of all kinds of lurid allegations. She complained and apparently it was fixed. She thinks she knows who did it.
-- Gary Kirk
What caused this is writing an article about someone who is not notable enough that the article would be read or watched. If it were not autobiographical, at least the creator of the article might have it on their watchlist. But as it is, who knew or cared? Our process depends on articles getting enough attention that errors are noticed.
Fred
How much an article is watched is not necessarily related to how notable it is. That said, it may be a relevant part of this case, but I haven't checked the article yet, so I couldn't tell if it was the case.
Mgm