Once again, I submit that "The Free Encyclopedia" is false advertising.

Because once you've read List_of_superhuman_features_and_abilities_in_fiction, you'll be forced to call it "the Nerd's Encyclopedia" or "Dork-o-Pedia".

Or most descriptive of all, "The Comic-Guy-o-Pedia".

Life is too short, so I'm just going to take your word for it.

Way too much bone manipulation going on there if you ask me …

Jon

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:LAME for some more hilarious pitiful examples of aspies hard at work.

Some of the sadder examples:

Death Star
Is it 120km or 160km in diameter? Even 900km? How shall they word that? Is the hyperdrive class 3 or 4? Who really cares? George Lucas apparently doesn't.


List of fictional ducks
You read that right; edit warring over nonexistent waterfowl. Page protections, admin interventions, accusations of vandalism and sockpuppetry fly like...well, like things that fly, anyway.

Daffy Duck
Did Daffy Duck father any children? Should the events of certain animated films be taken to have occurred in "real life" while others should not? Daffy to Wikipedia: "No comment". A Barbara Walters special is reportedly in the works.

Kanto (Pokémon)
A huge discussion broke out regarding the notability of a particular truck appearing in some iterations of the Pokémon series and whether the accompanying images fell under fair use. The article's talk page ballooned over ten times from 12,000 bytes to 140,000 bytes and spilled over onto several users' talk pages.

Avril Lavigne
Was her radio hit from her debut album, Let Go, spelled "I'm With You", or was it spelled "I'm with You"? Intense edit warring ensued, and continues, over this contentious matter. Many personal attacks and a request for page protection were also included

Cranky Kong
Was Cranky Kong the original Donkey Kong? Could it be the character in Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64 games is actually his son? Or perhaps his grandson? Should we trust offhand comments made by a video-game character? Does being licensed by Nintendo make Rareware publications "official"? How official is the "Nintendo Seal of Quality"? To some people, these questions are a matter of life and death. (For the record, the Nintendo Seal of Quality was, as the name implies, a means of quality control related to the company's internal policy regarding third-party software. But it's still a lame edit war.)

Tifa Lockhart
Does Tifa, a character in a PlayStation game (Final Fantasy VII), have "ample breasts"? Lengthy debate over wording, whether breast size is POV, and the entire concept of mentioning something that silly.



---

And if I remember right, about a year ago the article on "Dungeons and Dragons Alignment" had a list of fictional characters used as examples of different types of "character alignment". There was an edit war on the talk page over, say, whether Batman qualified as "Lawful Good" or "Chaotic Good", whether Two-Face qualified as "Evil" or "Neutral", and other crap like that. I loled.

This is, of course, where Wikipedia works best as a resource - because nobody but the involved editors really care. They spend their hours happily huffing some obscure factiod, resulting in a page alteration of perhaps three or four words. The people reading the article either before or after the edit change are extremely unlikely to have their view of the subject changed - and if they are they can join in the editing fun.

Also, re "aspies" - nothing like advertising your lack of knowledge regarding such individuals; those working on Wikipedia are not representational of most on the Spectrum - most would be unable to comprehend that facts are alterable. Most ASD editors on WP are more likely to be mild but high functioning autistic, able to understand that it is possible to portray different truths about the same subject (actually, I doubt if most neuro typicals can properly comprehend that - thus the torturous debates about npov and due weight). Someone with Aspergers would not be able to enter the debate, since they could not conceive that there was anything to discuss.

Oh yeah, great idea. Allow people with high-functioning autism to write an "encyclopedia". Better yet! Let's make some of them administrators, and let them run the place as they see fit! Yeah, that's got to be a Golden Road To Quality!

Not notable. Definitely not notable. Uh oh, fifteen minutes to Wapner.

So what, people with autism are not allowed to function in society? That's a pretty fucking retarded view.

You might want to rethink your wording on that last post.

That's not what I said. Autistic people can be very good workers.

However.....Leaving them unsupervised, unaccountable, in charge of a
complex and massive project like WP, is a bad, bad idea. Okay?

How is a fact, given that it is a fact, alterable?

In the next sentence he says "it is possible to portray different truths about the same subject ". LHVU is most probably referring to how varying the portrayal of facts can alter its perception and make the fact look different. The fact itself is not alterable, of course.

If a tree falls in the forest when nobody is looking, then the fact that the tree has fallen cannot be altered. But what if someone stumbles upon the tree and claims that it fell three days ago when it was in fact fallen two days ago? What if he identifies incorrectly the causes of the falling? What if he interprets them incorrectly in order to push his soon-to-be-published innovative theory about why trees fall in the forest when nobody is looking? What if then accesses the wikipedia article on forests, and makes a few subtle changes to support his theory? What if his change stands? Then his biased observations would be considered a fact, and they would be held as truth over the actual fact in itself. The fact remains unchanged, but, for practical purposes, it has been altered. In summary: "facts can be altered" is an abuse of language so you don't have to give a long explanation about objective reality versus perceived reality.