In a message dated 10/25/2010 2:12:37 PM Pacific Daylight Time, wiki-list@phizz.demon.co.uk writes:
Superb. I was wondering when someone would actually say this. It is the point I made right at the beginning of all of this. That the drug pages should not be reflecting some controversy. >>
Nice way to twist what was said. I'm very glad that we report drug controversy. It shows that we are independent and reporting what is actually the state of the matter in society.
We are not beholden to the drug companies to report only what they state. That would be a very sorry position if we were.
He did not say that he doesn't want to report controversies. Read it again.
W
Forget medical information. How about making a plane that won't fall out of thesky?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/26/kenya-plane-homemade
I *facepalm*ed. ENGINEER HUBRIS IS NOT WHAT WIKIPEDIA IS FOR!
- d.
David Gerard wrote:
Forget medical information. How about making a plane that won't fall out of thesky?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/26/kenya-plane-homemade
I *facepalm*ed. ENGINEER HUBRIS IS NOT WHAT WIKIPEDIA IS FOR!
No, but it's what much of Wikipedia was written with.
--Michael Snow
On 26 October 2010 20:30, Michael Snow wikipedia@frontier.com wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
I *facepalm*ed. ENGINEER HUBRIS IS NOT WHAT WIKIPEDIA IS FOR!
No, but it's what much of Wikipedia was written with.
+1
Actually, it was the computer stuff that was the first area of Wikipedia that I found actually useful as a first place to look. Now it's *everything*, and I am daily awed at the utterly breathtaking thing that we have, in fact, built here.
There's a place for applied engineer hubris[1]. With due caution.
- d.
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:38 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
There's a place for applied engineer hubris[1]. With due caution.
- d.
(grump)
While generally true, there's a lack of regard there for engineering-oriented polymaths.
On 26 October 2010 20:49, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:38 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
There's a place for applied engineer hubris[1]. With due caution. [1] http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/engineers%20and%20woo
(grump) While generally true, there's a lack of regard there for engineering-oriented polymaths.
Well, I did two years of engineering myself, and RW is not short of engineers ;-)
- d.
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 13:38, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 October 2010 20:30, Michael Snow wikipedia@frontier.com wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
I *facepalm*ed. ENGINEER HUBRIS IS NOT WHAT WIKIPEDIA IS FOR!
No, but it's what much of Wikipedia was written with.
This is the kind of test of our accuracy we really don't want. :)
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org