<img alt="" height="1" width="1" />[b]Wikipedia founder shares passion with Indianapolis crowd[/b]
Indianapolis Star
Jimmy Wales (on monitor), founder of Wikipedia, flashes a thumbs-up today during a question-and-answer session following his keynote presentation at the annual conference of electronic and direct marketing company Exact Target at the JW Marriott Hotel ...
and more »
View the article
Comments:
QUOTE
Name withheld
8:09 PM on September 13, 2011
This comment was left by a user who has been blocked by our staff.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
thekohser
11:41 PM on September 13, 2011
Assuming that Bruce is a journalist, I have to wonder where this false notion of Jimmy Wales as "the founder" of Wikipedia comes from. Dr. Larry Sanger is the one who pushed Wales to install wiki software for Wales' failing encyclopedia project. Sanger named the new initiative "Wikipedia". Sanger issued the first public call for participation in Wikipedia. Sanger even labored for months and months helping to craft the core policies and guidelines that still govern Wikipedia today. Wales took about 30 minutes to look up some wiki freeware and install it on a server that he and his company partners owned. Once the project began to take hold, Wales pushed Sanger out the door, waited another couple of years, then began weaving this fiction that Wales was the founder, or even more ridiculously, the "sole founder", of Wikipedia. I don't know about others in Indiana, but as a son of the Midwest myself, I want some truth from my journalists, rather than regurgitating public relations pablum.
8:09 PM on September 13, 2011
This comment was left by a user who has been blocked by our staff.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
thekohser
11:41 PM on September 13, 2011
Assuming that Bruce is a journalist, I have to wonder where this false notion of Jimmy Wales as "the founder" of Wikipedia comes from. Dr. Larry Sanger is the one who pushed Wales to install wiki software for Wales' failing encyclopedia project. Sanger named the new initiative "Wikipedia". Sanger issued the first public call for participation in Wikipedia. Sanger even labored for months and months helping to craft the core policies and guidelines that still govern Wikipedia today. Wales took about 30 minutes to look up some wiki freeware and install it on a server that he and his company partners owned. Once the project began to take hold, Wales pushed Sanger out the door, waited another couple of years, then began weaving this fiction that Wales was the founder, or even more ridiculously, the "sole founder", of Wikipedia. I don't know about others in Indiana, but as a son of the Midwest myself, I want some truth from my journalists, rather than regurgitating public relations pablum.
From the article:
Bruce C. Smith -- Pulitzer candidate?
Bruce may be reached at: (317) 444-6081.
QUOTE
Wales' lofty idea was nothing short of creating a place for every person on the plant to have free access to the sum of all human knowledge.
And this body of information isn't copyright-protected, so it may be used and reused it in any way.
...
Wikipedia has grown to at least 408 to nearly million unique visitors each month.
...
Africa has the smallest population of Wikipedia users, so Wales said that's where the organization this year opened its first office outside of the U.S.
...
"Knowledge isn't handed from on high, but its something to work with and create," he said.
And this body of information isn't copyright-protected, so it may be used and reused it in any way.
...
Wikipedia has grown to at least 408 to nearly million unique visitors each month.
...
Africa has the smallest population of Wikipedia users, so Wales said that's where the organization this year opened its first office outside of the U.S.
...
"Knowledge isn't handed from on high, but its something to work with and create," he said.
Bruce C. Smith -- Pulitzer candidate?
Bruce may be reached at: (317) 444-6081.
I'll try to call Mr. Smith tomorrow. Doubt it will do anything, though--from personal experience,
minor journalists like him, working for dull Midwestern newspapers, are more prone to write
drivel and get it printed, than to check anything and possibly turn up something "negative".
Isn't it funny, that all these journos keep repeating that "all human knowledge" crap? Sometimes I wonder
if it's tattooed on Jimbo's penis. (So the journalists can see it when they, well.....)
This is from the Indianapolis Star. That's a Pulliam paper. Notoriously right-wing and "happy-talk" oriented.
And btw, I've got bad news, Wikipedia: your article about Eugene C. Pulliam (T-H-L-K-D), the late owner
of the Star, contains no references or sources whatsoever. And has been tagged as such since 2007.
Gettin' better all the time, eh Wiki-bitches?
minor journalists like him, working for dull Midwestern newspapers, are more prone to write
drivel and get it printed, than to check anything and possibly turn up something "negative".
Isn't it funny, that all these journos keep repeating that "all human knowledge" crap? Sometimes I wonder
if it's tattooed on Jimbo's penis. (So the journalists can see it when they, well.....)
This is from the Indianapolis Star. That's a Pulliam paper. Notoriously right-wing and "happy-talk" oriented.
And btw, I've got bad news, Wikipedia: your article about Eugene C. Pulliam (T-H-L-K-D), the late owner
of the Star, contains no references or sources whatsoever. And has been tagged as such since 2007.
Gettin' better all the time, eh Wiki-bitches?
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 13th September 2011, 11:01pm) 
Isn't it funny, that all these journos keep repeating that "all human knowledge" crap? Sometimes I wonder if it's tattooed on Jimbo's penis. (So the journalists can see it when they, well.....)
When they blow him? Heck, you can say it. I don't think I've yet to read a live interview of Jimbo where the journalist didn't do a fluff-and-buff, followed by a polish.
I don't really know why that is. My best guess is that:
1) Journalism has been corrupted by the Larry King school of "softball interviewing," due to the fact that journalists are lazy and underpaid and really cannot afford to do anything else.
2) Jouralists are not intelligent enough not to confuse the messenger with the message, and almost all of them therefore, during the period required for a soft interview, are unable to disenthrall themselves from the idea that a man who supposedly started an encyclopedia of all human knowledge, may not actually be a human encyclopedia himself, ala Isaac Asimov. That he may, in fact, not really know much more about the world than the average journalist. And that he isn't any smarter. And (this part is really horrible) is of no better moral character than the average journalist, either.
3)
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.