[WikiEN-l] Rod Liddle, Spectator, on his Wikipedia article

[Carcharoth]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/147.252.90.42

Dublin Institute of Technology, apparently.

Carcharoth

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Carcharoth <carcharothwp at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Maybe he hit preview and never saved the edits? :-)
> Or he edited the wrong article (you never know, it could be that simple).
> Ask him if he knows what "preview" and "diff" means.
>
> Hmm. What was the date of all this again?
>
> I've found vandalism on the *talk* page:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cristiano_Ronaldo&diff=281261008&oldid=281162798
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cristiano_Ronaldo&diff=281261088&oldid=281261008
>
> Surely it couldn't be that simple?
>
> Carcharoth
>
> On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Charles Matthews
> <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> Update on the farrago. Apparently they printed my letter in the 25 April
>> edition of The Spectator.
>>
>> Liddle responds:
>>
>> http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/the-week/3573521/part_2/letters.thtml
>>
>> Spectator readers respond to recent articles
>>
>> I did foul Ronaldo
>>
>> Sir: Let me assure Charles Matthews (Letters, 25 April) that I most
>> certainly vandalised Cristiano Ronaldo’s Wikipedia page — on not one but
>> two occasions. This would suggest that the site’s ‘history’ section is
>> every bit as inaccurate as every other part of Wikipedia. It’s fun, but
>> most people would be advised to trust it about as far as they would a
>> press statement from Derek Draper.
>>
>> Rod Liddle
>> Marlborough, Wiltshire
>>
>> My comment (placed onsite, may not get past moderation):
>>
>> Rod, you don't convince. What you wrote can be checked. Article
>> histories log all edits: it's a database, that's what the software does,
>> no inaccuracies. Ask someone under 30. The odd thing is that journos
>> wishing to convince the gullible that "the Internet" has intrinsic "low
>> standards" tend to fall into this trap of making confident, wild claims
>> (cf. Giles Hattersley of The Sunday Times); if you don't actually
>> understand the medium yet, try not writing about it. Adopting perceived
>> lazy standards as your own, where convenient, used to be called "going
>> native", in the old days.
>>
>> Charles
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>