Full Version: Wikipedia is unreliable in its current form. So why do its users ... - Guardian Unlimited
•Wikipedia is unreliable in its current form. So why do its users ...
Guardian Unlimited, UK -25 minutes ago
The "spirit of Wikipedia" is at risk, we're told; its fundamental philosophy is under attack. Good. About time. Allowing anyone to contribute to it without ...
View the article
QUOTE(Newsfeed @ Wed 28th January 2009, 12:47am) 
Nice little commentary, (and helps demonstrate the increasingly widespread discrediting of wikipedia).
Usual swarm of swivel-eyed "wikipedians" turning up to astroturf the comments and throw a few personal-attack smokebombs.
QUOTE(UseOnceAndDestroy @ Tue 27th January 2009, 5:56pm)
Nice little commentary, (and helps demonstrate the increasingly widespread discrediting of wikipedia).
It's not a bad piece, but his implied premise is that Wikipedians are opposed to flagged revs. The evidence we have is that Wikipedians are, by a large majority, in favour of flagged revs on all BLPs. The reason Jimbo's had to step in and implement it by pseudo-fiat isn't that Wikipedians oppose flagged revs, but that Wikipedia's structure prohibits decision making. It's a structural problem, not primarily a political one.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.