tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post3688517594960498853..comments2023-09-15T04:27:57.129-04:00Comments on Commentarama: Encyclopedia UpdaticaAndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-26021179190665981042010-01-06T11:37:10.482-05:002010-01-06T11:37:10.482-05:00Joel: I've noticed that even during disagreem...Joel: I've noticed that even during disagreements on our site, the arguments are almost always based on sound reasoning and some pretty solid facts. I truly appreciate the fact that our readers seem to be a cut above, and know the very limited usefulness of a Wikipedia type of source for their information. On other blog sites, I often see truly skewed "facts," and many have no compunctions whatsoever about citing Wikipedia as their source.<br /><br />It's human nature to look for shortcuts, but Wikipedia is more than a shortcut. Too often, it's a detour. A shame that there really isn't an alternative. But as StanH said, it's free and you get what you pay for.LawHawkRFDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17800255923675295515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-68627024011385472462010-01-06T10:09:08.302-05:002010-01-06T10:09:08.302-05:00LawHawk,
Until there is a definitive alternative ...LawHawk,<br /><br />Until there is a definitive alternative to Wikipedia, I fear that it will be used by most people. I remember getting into an argument with a Global Warming idiot. He used Wikipedia.Joel Farnhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15856960977033430002noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-1382741630180251622010-01-06T03:58:45.741-05:002010-01-06T03:58:45.741-05:00HamiltonsGhost: I haven't bothered reading an...HamiltonsGhost: I haven't bothered reading any Wikipedia entries on unions, since I get that information from real encyclopedias and respected new sources, then read what the National Right to Work Foundation has to say on the subject. But your conclusion sounds about right. <br /><br />I think the commenter knows nothing about the union strikes during the height of the Guadalcanal campaign. And I'm sure he doesn't know that post WWII unions were trying desperately to purge themselves of mafiosos and communists (or the prominent and open leadership of avowed communists who had no compunction about stopping their war efforts as soon as Germany was defeated and Uncle Joe Stalin was safe). They succeeded partially, but the Obama administration (and their leftist Secretary of Labor) are quickly going soft on the unions that are clearly dominated by far leftists (if not actual communists): See articles on the SEIU, but don't read them on Wikipedia. Note carefully the political affiliations of the leaders.LawHawkRFDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17800255923675295515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-10094265632315693892010-01-06T03:44:29.546-05:002010-01-06T03:44:29.546-05:00Lawhawk--I just read a comment on The Volokh Consp...Lawhawk--I just read a comment on The Volokh Conspiracy (repeated on InstaPundit). The subject was that Ford sales are growing, while GM and Chrysler sales are falling. Main thrust: Union benefits and government control are killing the latter two. Says one commenter: Arrowsmith says:<br /><br />"I will never buy a .gov auto.I do not support the concept and the UNIONS can lick the dirt off my shoes.I just do not understand why the companies do not move the whole thing to a non union state.They would have no problem getting happy workers at half or a third of their cost now.And these people would live good middle income lives at those wages.Why they stay in dead corrupt states is beyond any understanding. The Japan auto makers are much smarter.<br /><br /><i>If you hate unions, you hate America. The unions built American industry and won us WW II.</i> (I did the italicization)." <br /><br />I think we just read a comment by someone who gets his information from Wikipedia. Starts out with a personal opinion (not an entirely bad one), then concludes with a "fact."HamiltonsGhosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07777000856977635480noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-50216505793604349662010-01-06T00:16:12.576-05:002010-01-06T00:16:12.576-05:00USArtGuy: Aha! So that's who Positron is. L...USArtGuy: Aha! So that's who Positron is. LOL. I've read too many articles about Wikipedia and their loosey-goosey policy on who's allowed to post and alter. They're not only at war with the more conservative writers, but apparently they're even at war with each other. It's more like a gigantic dysfunctional blog than an academic enterprise, let alone an encyclopedia. 67 million hits--HOLY SMOKE!LawHawkRFDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17800255923675295515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-28303574063642572072010-01-06T00:02:09.985-05:002010-01-06T00:02:09.985-05:00I began to have concerns about Wikipedia during th...I began to have concerns about Wikipedia during the primaries before the last presidential elections. Drudge linked to articles about how information regarding people running for office would change <i>hourly</i> (or even more often), because many supporters/detractors became administrators. I looked into it a bit at the time. Real credentials in any particular area didn't seem necessary to become an administrator. Plus, administrators had/have the power to block contributors and each other if they don't like what they read.<br /><br />Additionally, I believe there was some hubbub recently about how articles regarding one type of cancer (melanoma?) weren't merely wrong, but dangerously so.<br /><br />I Googled the words "Wikipedia AND wrong" just now and got over 67 million hits. interesting.<br /><br />USArtguy AKA positron57 --I didn't realize I logged in the other day as my alter ego... now I know how Iron Man feels ;-)USArtguyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06062334713741697082noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-19965602496626134152010-01-05T22:13:39.241-05:002010-01-05T22:13:39.241-05:00Tennessee: I do the same thing you do. But the d...Tennessee: I do the same thing you do. But the difference for us is that we can get that common general information, and stop at that. Too many Americans don't have the background for knowing when to stop accepting Wikipedia information. We can read an article and tell when it's inaccurate or slanted, but the largest number of people using Wiki as a primary source have no independent knowledge to make them say: "That doesn't sound right, I'd better check the original sources."LawHawkRFDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17800255923675295515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-85711147628961575772010-01-05T22:09:51.934-05:002010-01-05T22:09:51.934-05:00Tam: Great! I know that many teachers and colleg...Tam: Great! I know that many teachers and college instructors are starting specifically to warn students that if they recognize a Wikipedia citation, the student will be graded down.LawHawkRFDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17800255923675295515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-71030707894069663792010-01-05T22:07:54.707-05:002010-01-05T22:07:54.707-05:00Bev: No rebuke whatsoever. I know you use real s...Bev: No rebuke whatsoever. I know you use real sources for anything more than surface information. Besides, I steal about half of my stock photos from Wikipedia. I can't point the finger at anyone.LawHawkRFDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17800255923675295515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-6966518446722423472010-01-05T22:06:18.979-05:002010-01-05T22:06:18.979-05:00WriterX: You, Andrew and I should become administ...WriterX: You, Andrew and I should become administrators for Wikipedia. Then we could also get input from all our readers. We'd turn that sucker around overnight.LawHawkRFDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17800255923675295515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-68398818530239249152010-01-05T22:04:57.709-05:002010-01-05T22:04:57.709-05:00Andrew: The problem with Wikipedia is its inconsi...Andrew: The problem with Wikipedia is its inconsistencies (not to mention constant revisions). The other problem is that we've been through good schools, parental guidance, and years of genuine research. Many people have not, and younger people almost never. That was who the warning was aimed at. No matter how educated or how borderline illiterate a reader of Britannica may be, he or she will get the right information. Not so for Wikipedia.LawHawkRFDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17800255923675295515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-9978490856742957102010-01-05T22:01:23.193-05:002010-01-05T22:01:23.193-05:00StanH: You're right. I use it for those purp...StanH: You're right. I use it for those purposes all the time, but I usually get side-tracked when I start catching errors in either narrative or historical fact.LawHawkRFDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17800255923675295515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-34889391319106359752010-01-05T21:59:31.791-05:002010-01-05T21:59:31.791-05:00Patti: Sorry to be so late replying, but I've...Patti: Sorry to be so late replying, but I've been away from home and computers most of the day. Let me loose on Wiki's history pieces, and the world will change. LOLLawHawkRFDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17800255923675295515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-12933048696972422782010-01-05T21:43:00.340-05:002010-01-05T21:43:00.340-05:00Hawk, my parents got World Book for my brother and...Hawk, my parents got World Book for my brother and myself. I don't trust Wikipedia for very much unless it is looking up a musician's discography or an actor's general biography. As Andrew points out, the value flucuates greatly so if it is anything important, I'd NEVER use it as a sole source.Tennessee Jedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10604275115906776992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-20676812394953910522010-01-05T20:26:37.409-05:002010-01-05T20:26:37.409-05:00If it makes you feel any better, I tutor online an...If it makes you feel any better, I tutor online and our company doesn't allow us to use wiki as a reference with our students. We can use it as a quick refresher, and if a student uses wiki, we have to remind them that it is an unreliable source.Tamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16892551860593187175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-5232772697953835652010-01-05T20:05:55.284-05:002010-01-05T20:05:55.284-05:00Is this a rebuke for using Wikipedia for my New Ye...Is this a rebuke for using Wikipedia for my New Year's Eve object drop post? I'm sorry...really...it will never happen again. ;-)<br /><br />Actually, like Andrew and StanH, I use it as a quick first look on a subject before other research. And the links are useful especially in research on medical issues. <br /><br />We were a World Book Encyclopedia family. Later we got Encyclopaedia Britannica, but it was too intellectual for me.BevfromNYChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14953050916932306270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-78965500510671019872010-01-05T19:52:06.667-05:002010-01-05T19:52:06.667-05:00I remember the set of encyclopedias my parents had...I remember the set of encyclopedias my parents had. Used those for many a book report in elementary school. I especially remember the volume "X" had these plastic pages that were in color. For x-ray, maybe? I forget. <br /><br />Anyway, anyone who rely on Wiki to learn about Al Gore's global warming and the supposedly declining polar bear population might also be the same people who buy term papers on Al Gore's Internet.<br /><br />Interesting post, LawHawk!Writer Xhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16505411188186283813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-87057761469816596702010-01-05T18:52:44.401-05:002010-01-05T18:52:44.401-05:00The value of the Wikipedia varies greatly dependin...The value of the Wikipedia varies greatly depending on who wrote the content. I've found a lot of their science/medical stuff to be very good. Some of their history stuff has been quite good, but the rest was horribly wrong. They're generally pretty good when you want to find out who some band was/is, but I would never rely on them for anything political and I would always try to verify what they tell me.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-35157163383718823562010-01-05T18:51:01.036-05:002010-01-05T18:51:01.036-05:00Wiki, "facts" on the quick and free, you...Wiki, "facts" on the quick and free, you get what you pay for. It’s a good quick reference for dates, and spelling, sometimes. If you want to get an understanding, get to the source, dig down, and the truth will be revealed. It’s very worrisome that many kids today use Wiki for end all reference, not good.StanHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07395708786509590321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-23765240941551839042010-01-05T18:24:43.876-05:002010-01-05T18:24:43.876-05:00i wish i was one of wiki's "friendly user...i wish i was one of wiki's "friendly users"...oh man what fun i'd have. 5th graders histroy reports would never be the same. of course i would be found out and denounced as a tea-bagger, or a constitution-hugger or a ~gasp~ republican, but still, it would be fun...pattihttp://www.notawonk.comnoreply@blogger.com