I suppose it's all trial and error. And you certainly take your Helium seriously. ;) I just used that as an example. I would take the more dom. meaning would be the gas if I really was talking about helium. ;) I really want to undo that one contributors redirect. Hee! I love learning about the ins & outs of wikipedia. I'm going to take that one posters advice and check out the definition of "Mars". Sorry I forgot your name. :)
One of my other wikipedia rants--is a group of people who took a celebrities page and made it get the stop sign of not being a neutral article. I tried correcting it, but it's a big mess, they keep putting THEIR opinion and not basic facts down. Talk about another mess on wikipedia.
janisc@adelphia.net (janisc@adelphia.net) [050723 09:00]:
One of my other wikipedia rants--is a group of people who took a celebrities page and made it get the stop sign of not being a neutral article. I tried correcting it, but it's a big mess, they keep putting THEIR opinion and not basic facts down. Talk about another mess on wikipedia.
This is a possibly unsolvable problem: people who turn an article on their favoured celebrity into something closer to hagiography and are obsessed with keeping it that way.
- d.
--- David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
This is a possibly unsolvable problem: people who turn an article on their favoured celebrity into something closer to hagiography and are obsessed with keeping it that way.
Come come. The ArbCom has dealt with this before and can do so again. This type of activity can not be tolerated.
-- mav
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Daniel Mayer (maveric149@yahoo.com) [050723 11:12]:
--- David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
This is a possibly unsolvable problem: people who turn an article on their favoured celebrity into something closer to hagiography and are obsessed with keeping it that way.
Come come. The ArbCom has dealt with this before and can do so again. This type of activity can not be tolerated.
It's endemic. Look at the article for almost any pop diva you can think of. I wasn't in any way thinking of a specific case.
- d.
--- janisc@adelphia.net wrote:
I suppose it's all trial and error. And you certainly take your Helium seriously. ;) I just used that as an example. I would take the more dom. meaning would be the gas if I really was talking about helium. ;) I really want to undo that one contributors redirect. Hee! I love learning about the ins & outs of wikipedia. I'm going to take that one posters advice and check out the definition of "Mars". Sorry I forgot your name. :)
No problemo. :) However, it turns out Mars is no longer a good example since somebody moved the article about the planet from [[Mars (planet)]] to [[Mars]] few months ago. Sigh - I'm not sure that was wise given that the god meaning is comparable in popularity to the planet meaning. So, see [[Pluto]] instead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto
One of my other wikipedia rants--is a group of people who took a celebrities page and made it get the stop sign of not being a neutral article. I tried correcting it, but it's a big mess, they keep putting THEIR opinion and not basic facts down. Talk about another mess on wikipedia.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org