Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A Look at the Editorial Changes on Wikipedia

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the troll-combat dept.

prostoalex writes "New York Times Technology section this weekend is running an extensive article on Wikipedia and recent changes to the editorial policy. Due to high level of partisan involvement some political topics like George Bush, Tony Blair and Opus Dei are currently either protected (editorials are allowed only to a selected group of Wikipedia members) or semi-protected (anyone who has had an account for more than four days can edit the article). From the article: 'Protection is a tool for quality control, but it hardly defines Wikipedia,' Mr. Wales said. 'What does define Wikipedia is the volunteer community and the open participation.'"

11 of 367 comments (clear)

  1. Re:No such thing..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Until Wikipedia adopts basic high-school level academic standards of requiring a reference for all factual claims, it will remain a sea of vomit.

  2. Re:What's the fuss? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know you're a geek when you know the correct plural in latin of a tool you never use. :)

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. Re:YRO? by NoMaster · · Score: 4, Funny
    Why is this YRO? Wiki isn't a government organization. If they don't like what Joe Random does, they can't kick the door down & send him to the gulag.
    Yet... ;-)

    Slashdot, circa 1925...
    "Why is this YRO? The MPAA isn't a government organization. If they don't like what Joe Random does, they can't kick the door down & send him to the gulag."

    --
    What part of "a well regulated militia" do you not understand?
  4. Oh, the irony! by Hikaru79 · · Score: 5, Funny

    New York Times is complaining that Wikipedia requires users to register in order to be able to edit the content? Heck, I usually have to register just to READ NYT's content.

  5. Re:No such thing..... by mdwh2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Until Wikipedia adopts basic high-school level academic standards of requiring a reference for all factual claims, it will remain a sea of vomit.

    Where is your reference for this claim?

  6. Re:No such thing..... by Eccles · · Score: 4, Funny

    Give me a moment... Ok, it's from an article on wikipedia. Look up "sea of vomit."

    --
    Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
  7. A true geek by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Would know the latin word vaginae as well, and yes... only as a word and it's theoretical functionality.

  8. Re:George W. Bush will always be protected by abscissa · · Score: 1, Funny

    GEORGE W. BUSH WILL ALWAYS BE PROTETED!! Because GOD IS ON HIS SIDE!! MAY ANGELS &c. PROTECT HIM!!

    OK mod me troll/flamebait please. I have had too much to drink, but I can get my Karma back.

  9. Re:What's the fuss? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Never? Dude, your bladder must really be hurtin' by now.

  10. Re:Yeah.. I looked it up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    perhaps some of our male USian friends can enlighten me

    I can't seem to find USia on any map, but then again we Americans are notoriously bad a geography. Perhaps you could help us out.

  11. Re:Slashdot has the chance to get it right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    Ah, well. I keep looking at the New York Times site, looking for the "edit this page" button to correct the errors, but of course, that's impossible.

    Indeed.

    I was going to agree on your blog itself, but...

    Comments are closed.

    How ironic.