QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 9:38am)
QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 2:28pm)
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Wed 3rd March 2010, 9:16am)
As a run on form
this article, where a breaching experiment showed how easy it was to get libels on to the mainpage as DYK, I opened a thread
on ANI.
I'm amazed. (Although I shouldn't be)
The response seems to be that it is the hoaxers fault, and it would be too onerous to expect DYK people to actually do any fact checking before putting an article on the mainpage of Wikipedia!!!
This is typical:
"I think the bottom line here is that there isn't much we can do to prevent elaborate hoaxes, short of draconian measures that, as another user suggested above, would mean we are not "the encyclopedia anyone can edit" anymore." — Gatoclass I see the potential for a teachable moment coming out of this system test — I think that concept is preferable to "breach burp" — but the learning curve at
The Wikipedia Review (let's be honest) is almost as uninclined as the flatline of Wikipedia itself, so I don't know if it's worth the ergs and secs or not.
But if you were to try — really, really try — to analyze the inevitable failure of all future interventions of this ilk, what would the root cause of that failure be?
Jon Awbrey
People playing a game with indifference to the consequences to others.
I'd call them "BLP deniers" — but I'd be accused of breaching one of Gadwink's precious laws.
I can't find a suitable ostrich on Commons.
I really want to create a new award for BLP "head in the sand" brigade
After Action Analysis —FAIL № 1. Trying to de-convert cultists and fundamentalists is a waste of time. No accumulation of disconfirming evidence will ever touch the devoutly wishful beliefs of the consummate believer. The only hope of success — admittedly slim — will depend on bringing external attention and pressure to bear.
FAIL â„– 2. Focusing on content is a waste of time. Let's face it, hoaxes are funny. People chuckle, cluck their tongues, and move on to the next one. Unless it's U. But no one cares about U. Except maybe sometimes U.
I have come to realize that it's very difficult for some people to grasp the utter futility of FAIL № 2. That's probably because the alternative is so hard to contemplate — you have to look at process, you have to get other people to look at process, and analyzing process is
hard.
My guess is that people will keep on keeping on — they just haven't suffered enough yet.
Jon Awbrey