Slashdot Mirror
The Register Takes Aim at Wikipedia Again
Syberghost writes "The Register has fired off another salvo in their long-running war of words with Wikipedia, in the form of an article about the lack of "moral responsibility" from the operators of Wikipedia. Wikipedia users fired back less than an hour later, making the Register headline obsolete."
and slashdot will make this article irrelevant by posting it several times over in various forms
If that Wiki entry is firing back, the gunpowder must have been wet.
wikipediOWNED!
/.
UGH, it's wikipediPWNED! I'm so sick and tired of poor spelling on
D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
They should be held just as accountable as, say, the Boston Globe.
online debating is to real debating as wikipedia is to a real encyclopedia
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
If you knew their history, you would know why.
Founded in Nazi Germany by Adolph Hitler they were used to register all Jews marked for death in concentration camps. During the 60's, they supported neo-Nazis in America and were involved in the Kennedy Assassination. In the 90's they started covering IT news.
- From WikiPedia
Yes, of course. In the wonderful world of the Wikipedists, anything they say is golden because it's in a kind of encyclopedia, which automatically justifies it as being the absolute truth and if you don't like it you can change it yourself or go whine about it on slashdot and claim that the "Wikipedia has fired back" and if this is a firing back then the ammo was a fart and I'm getting bored of writing in this long add-on sentence style that resembles some Wikipedia articles and so I'm going to stop now.
Daniel
Carpe Diem
so correct it? that's the whole point, jackass
I would like to introduce a neologism
relash: disgust with criticism or backlash.
Espcially when the topic has been already rehashed a few hundered times in these very comments.
I agree. We're planning on dumping our product in your neighborhood tomorrow. Please keep in mind that it's the communities job to handle things that impact the community.
Thanks,
Bob.
Bob's Toxic Waste & Dumping
Did you learn statistics from Wikipedia too?
I'm glad we have an authoritative opinion on this issue, otherwise I wouldn't know what to think about Wikipedia. Those reckless ne'er-do-wells should heed this criticism, because as we all know, British tabloids have never had their credibility called into question due to the publication of libelous or inaccurate information.
I attribute this scandal to the streak of rugged individualism present in American culture. When will you Yanks learn that the truth is decided by experts, and that expertise is determined by well-known and respected members of a field?
Founded in Nazi Germany by Adolph Hitlerthe UK by John Lettice and Mike "Crazy Brit" Magee in 1994. they were used to register all Jews marked for death in concentration camps report about technology. During the 60's, they supported neo-Nazis in America and were involved in the Kennedy Assassination did not exist. In the 90's they started covering IT news.
- From WikiPedia
An engineer who makes one mistake, even if it is not fatal, will lose his license. Why is that? Because said mistakes cannot be tolerated.
Is this erroneous information something you picked up reading Wikipedia, or is it just a product of your own personal ignorance and stupidity?
Gold mining requires panning tons of mud, explosives or cyanide spraying.
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu
my comment was intended to skewer online debating which, more often than not, degrades to, "I'm smarter than you". This is nothing more than the geeks equivalent of, "my dick's bigger than yours".
:)
And yes, I am smarter than you and my dick is bigger than yours.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
"One shouldn't take any single source to be reliable, ever."
Yeah, what he said!
You must be new to British tabloid journalism.
--Rob
Towards the Singularity.
I don't know... it worked pretty well when I tried it.
The author wants the administrators to be held responsible, true, but not for the content of the site, as you seem to think; but rather, for the impression that Wikipedia gives that it is a reliable source of information. Personally, I think this is a valid argument.
It's because of people like you that my hair dryer has a warning not to use it while sleeping.
I know too many people who think Wikipedia is a reliable source of information.
Then just give them a hair dryer and tell them it's nap time, problem solved.
I've got 3 Register T-Shirts and 0 Wikipedia ones
victory to vulture central
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
And now people are trying to use slander and legal tactics to damage them, a non-profit, free online resource, made up of volunteers. Humanity doesn't get any lower than that.
It's hilarious, or not; Wikipedia's critics are exactly what they claim to oppose, unaccountable slanderous bastards.
Sorry for the rant, people who are so bent on controlling other people just really piss me off.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden