Posted by Van Helsing on October 15, 2007, 3:41 pm
Mary Fisher wrote:
Its certainly no worse than most of the other sources quoted here so
far... and you always have the remedy of correcting it if you do not
believe its accurate.
Posted by Eeyore on October 15, 2007, 4:15 pm
Van Helsing wrote:
Speaking as someone who has both edited Wikipedia articles and even started new
ones, I'll add that their editing history is readily available to anyone
interested. It's entirely transparent.
Posted by Jim on October 15, 2007, 6:28 pm
Yes Graham, so you can see precisely which anonymous foole has wasted
everyone's time with his BS.
I used to spend hours daily w/WP, but it's a losing battle....
Posted by Mary Fisher on October 15, 2007, 4:54 pm
I know, but that isn't a recommendation.
I believe my own experience. Others won't, that's their problem, not mine.
It's still a wonder why they seem so keen to prove me wrong though when they
can't. Still, everyone needs a hobby :-)
Posted by Jim on October 15, 2007, 6:24 pm
As a former Wikipedian, there is nothing that can fix WP; its
presupposition, that people are inherently good and truthful, is flawed.