Death erection

Isn't popular-culture guff supposed to be folded into the main text?

I only bring this one up because it's so poorly written....and because of the fascinating and demented discussions you will find in the talkpage. Including discussions of photos, long since removed, of hanged corpses with erections. (Even Everyking objected to those!)

And best of all, listen to the audio file.
He mispronounced many words, including "Godot".
How professional of him. Such quality.

They have an audio recording of their article on "death erections" but not even one on, say, Abraham Lincoln or World War II.

That says all I need to know right there. No comment.

--

And for anyone who's not willing to browse the talk page, here's a few things that were discussed:

*Whether or not to use Urban Dictionary as a citation

*Whether or not it counts as a "death erection" when a guy dies while masturbating (in Clerks to be more specific)

*Some anons were complaining about the article linking to Liveleak pictures of murder victims and soldiers killed in Iraq.

*You're all a bunch of faggots!"

*And of course,

"Well Roman is not nearly related to Islam so its translation is not the justification. Secondly It will raise anger and hatred. Also the given reference is very irrelevant and a result of prejudice. Also consider the person Abulfida was living atleast Five Centuries Later from Prophet Muhammad's ( Peace Be Upon Him ). So Please Quit Hating Our Prophet Because we also Love Jesus."—Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.8.86 (talk) 19:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

--

Again, no comment. But whatever, Jimbo says this is the best encyclopedia ever, so it must be true.

Death Erection would make one heck of an effective name for a heavy metal band, though.

Come on, come on. Let's not fall into easy sensationalism. The wikiproject that records articles takes them from a category of suggested articles Category:Spoken_Wikipedia_requests. If the list is lopsided then you should go add some good requests instead of complaining that it's broken.

Also, the guys making the audio recordings may be going for the low-hanging fruit first: the shorter articles that don't take too long to record. The Abraham Lincon article is 14,6 times longer and World War II article is 19,2 longer. Big articles will trigger the law of diminishing returns and the difficulty will not increase lineally with size (one article of 100k will take much more time and effort than ten articles of 10k, instead of taking the same, and you hit limitations in, for example, the recording software that you are using, the maximum file size when trying to upload or trying to send it to your own email to move it from one computer to other). In general, any software project that works well with small sizes will get unmanageable in big sizes unless you have planned the bigger size in anticipation and you were accurate in your predictions of what parts would have problems. Nobody sane would try to make those articles without making first a fair amount of small-sized and medium-sized articles, even of they are "unworthy" articles .

Does size really matter that much when it comes to cadaver boners?

(Sorry, but you did say "size" an awful lot there, and given the topic...)

Well, that one iconic morgue photo of John Dillinger should illustrate the article.

Infofreak (T-C-L-K-R-D) , someone's 5 year old, one-track-minded alternate account, has added 4 images to the article over the years. They've all been deleted from enwiki and commons for reasons that are unclear, considering all the other disrespectful death and porn crap that still exists.

Enric, I have a great suggestion for the list of requests! How about we add Wikivoices Episode #45? That way, we could record someone reading a transcript of the original audio session.

Now, how do we get a hold of that original audio file?

The more I find out about Wikipedia's dark corners, the more amazed I am that the kinds of folks who like to get legalistic about our childrens' morals haven't yet got legalistic with Wikipedia.

First you put your two knees close up tight,
Then you sway 'em to the left, then you sway 'em to the right,
Step around the floor kind of nice and light,
Then you twis' around and twis' around with all your might,
Stretch your lovin' arms straight out in space
Then do the Eagle Rock with style and grace
Swing your foot way 'round then bring it back,
Now that's what I call "Ballin' the Jack."

You know how men are: always thinking about sex. Seriously, lately I edit a lot of sex-related articles.

And now, for the stupid question:

What happens if the text of a spoken article is changed around completely, as happens
on a frequent basis? Does the person (or persons) who redoes the damned article
have to re-record the audio file? Who forces whom?

A MW-specific text-to-speech/screen-reader extension would be far easier and more efficient in the long run. Could add some kind of hidden tags or template in each article to configure surprise pronunciations using IPA, then choose the appropriate regional accent.

Good idea, actually. Small problem though.

How do you propose to teach all those random editors how to add the hidden tags, use IPA, etc?
Wikipedia developers can't even seem to devise a decent markup code, nor an easy-to-use edit system
that auto-formats the article. What exists now seems almost tailor-made to discourage casual writers
fror editing, while encouraging obsessive-compulsive teenagers, by being obscure and obtuse.....

I don't know how complicated it would need to be before recording an entire article without stammering, coughing, or slurring one's words became easier.

I should think the task of editing audio files to clean up vocal malfunctions such as these, plus removing background noise and over-dubbing any demonstrably false information, etc. would present a steeper learning curve for most people.

IPA isn't so hard to learn. In the ideal case wiktionary would store the majority of pronunciation data, and the extension would only need some automatic way to retrieve it (hoping of course it hasn't been vandalized e.g. /jʊˈreɪnəs/ → /joʊrˈeɪnəs/).