The Wikipedians Who Make it Happen

Phoe6 writes "Many of us might have wondered who these crazy people are, spending lot of time at wikipedia and presenting us with such an invaluable information. Wired has decided to give some credits to the most active wikipedians, in their article titled Wiki becomes a way of life"

Comments

Quality!

[tabkey12]

I always find the depth and quality of information on Wikipedia extremely helpful, but in my opinion, the care that is put into giving the background to anything from a medical condition to a technological term is truly amazing.

Good to see that a few of these people are getting the recognition that they deserve!

Re:Quality!

[PyWiz]

The people who write long definitions on Wikipedia are the same types of people who write long slashdot posts: people who must keep looking busy so their boss thinks they're working.

I have one thing to say...

[mattmentecky]

...Obsessive compulsive disorder


Wouldnt it be ironic, if the OCD wiki, was edited, relentlessly?

Re:I have one thing to say...

[TwistedSquare]

By someone, with an obsessive, compulsive, love of, commas, perhaps? ;-)

It's all just one big fraud

[nurhussein]

See, those Encyclopedists are just a cover for a political group that wants to take over the internet through the science of psychohistory. And they actually revealed their plans on their own website too, but say it's "fiction" to make it seem like a hoax! Brilliant.

Link to the first page...

[Stradenko]

page 1 of the article.

The link in the post goes to page two for me ... not very nice.

Contribute. But don't be an obsessive fixer

[mmThe1]

While I appreciate the passion in these cases, a little word of advice for the (and would be) enthusiasts: be cautious about becoming an obsessive fixer on any of the wikis (be it Wikipedia, or any similar website.) The obsessive fixers are PITA, specifically, the ones who turn a blind eye towards opinion of others. Many flame wars have errupted on these websites, not all of them being constructive for the content.

Be there. Contribute. But learn to read what others have to say. Let wikis evolve the way they are supposed to be. It's a website.

Kudos

[MetaPhyzx]

..to the ladies and gents who do contribute to Wikipedia; I am grateful for thier work, as well as my 12 year old(especially on the Sunday before an assignment is due). I'd better get in the habit of contributing...=)

Re:Wiki

[dkf]

That sometimes happens (e.g. the page on Dubya at the time of the last US election). When it does, the page gets locked for a while so people can cool off and focus instead on conveying facts and balanced opinions.

Re:I love the wikipedia,

[Jon Chatow]

Bandwidth isn't the problem (or the cost, really), but the servers. We spend $4k-ish a month on bandwidth (off the top of my head; ICBW), but we spent about $65k in just the last 6 months on servers (see the server list).

BTW, we prefer that people just call it "Wikipedia", without a definite article.

Slashdot Conspiracy

[Prince Vegeta SSJ4]

As I was sitting here, playing Go, and thinking about another variation of game theory, another link finally solved the puzzle of the Slashdot conspiracy.

Talking about the beginning of Wikipedia, I realized that this was posted on slashdot. Not long ago, I discovered that a moderator on slashdot was named Samzenpus, who is the second cousin twice removed of Snagglepus

Well Snagglepus is famous for saying "Heavens to Mergatroid

Mergatroid was the sister of a guy in a band called Newcleus

The guy just happens to say, and I quote:

• "(Yeah, that's how you do it Cozmo) (You were right, kid, that's the way you do it) (Yeah, like did you see when he went in the corner) (And he started doin' this) (Wikki-wikki-wikki-wikki) (Wikki-wikki-wikki-wikki)"

this song came out in the early eighties - a Paradox (how could a wiki exist in the eighties before wikis existed?). Cosmos, nucleus, wikis, it all makes sense now. Slashdot may look like an innocent little blog which slashdots servers from time to time, but they are in actuality trying to slashdot the universe

Re:but..

[kebes]

That couldn't happen legally. The content on wikipedia has already been released into the commons. The copyright clearly states that derivative works must remain open. Wikipedia (or Wikimedia, or whoever) does not have exclusive control over the content, and thus have no legal ability to sell it to anyone else.

If any company tried to take control like that, someone else could just fork the content and offer it for free again.

Don't worry, Slashdotting is insignificant...

[Jamesday]

Don't worry about it. Slashdotting is insignificant to us. Typically adds only 150-300 hits per second. Apache web server CPU use (we're about to buy 10 more), one of our Squid cache servers.

Now, how many places can honestly say that a Slashdotting is insignificant (ducking from CmdrTaco)?:-)

Re:Wikipedia is too biased to be useful

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is this comment being moderated up? A quick glance at the article's history shows that "Charles Manson" has never been added except for today, and has never been removed.

I think the most important Wikipedians..

[SimianOverlord]

...are the ones going around cleaning up other peoples messes. Occassionally I find it entertaining to drop into Wikipedia: Vandalism in progress and just look at the constant erosion of Wikipedia articles by schoolkids, dedicated trolls, the misinformed, or just the dogmatic.

To be honest though, it really shakes my confidence in Wikipedia articles, I mean how much is actually missed by the policemen? You've got multiple vandalisms from a few well known addresses, it's not a rare problem. A user doing one or two vandalisms in a bunch of legitimate edits is going to, on the whole, escape censure.

I really only trust articles which have been locked from editing as they have been validated repeatedly and are immune to the random vandalism that a little looked at page must inevitably gain.