On 1/15/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
On 1/14/07, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
- people sometimes forget.
True, but you indicated you did it because it was easier. That's why I had a problem with it.
Mgm
I don't remember saying that, and it's not really true. I would have gladly stuck http://robogeo.com/ into a box which said "Enter your source here:" if it was required. Of course, if I had put it in the original article, that would have just made it look like an ad (as it is some people already thought it looked like an ad, even though if anything I meant the article as a warning for others not to bother downloading the crippled software like I had).
Now, did I know that there was a way to add those fancy schmancy reference tags to an article. Yes. I didn't know the syntax of the tags, but I did know they existed. In the end I did finally figure out how to add the sources, which was done 41 minutes later. But someone else who knew the syntax could have added those same sources a lot faster and more easily.
IMO wikis are supposed to be about collaboration, not about figuring out all the rules you have to follow to keep your contributions from being removed. My little contribution to the sum of human knowledge was supposed to be that the demo for RoboGEO "intentionally adds errors of around a kilometer into the data". As far as I'm concerned, once you know that about it, nothing else matters.
Anthony