Featured Posts

Using Multiple Calendars in Outlook 2007 Imagine that you use Outlook at work to maintain your work schedule, and Google Calendar at home to keep track of your personal life, and you want to keep the two schedules together, but separate. You...

Readmore

Getting all your QAM channels on Comcast with EyeTV... For Christmas I got an elgato EyeTV Hybrid, and I was excited. I was excited about recording shows (and movies) in HD. I was excited to get rid of the old low-definition DVD recorder. I was excited...

Readmore

Install Windows 7 x64 on a Mac (beat the Select CD-ROM... Having trouble installing Win7 x64 (Windows 7 64-bit) on your mac? Keep getting a Select CD-ROM Boot Type" message when you go to install? Boot Camp have you pulling your hair out? Some googling...

Readmore

File compression primer (With .jpg examples for Adobe... Compression Compression typically looks for patterns and stores references to them. So, imagine you're storing the following text which is 151 characters long: He went to the store.  She bought...

Readmore

  • Prev
  • Next

My Wikipedia Experience

Posted on : 10-07-2007 | By : Andy | In : tech, work

2

So I just finished posting an article about Step2 on Wikipedia, and it scares me. Why, do you ask?

Within a few minutes of posting, the “Step2″ page must have showed up on the “recent changes” section of the site, and a few people made notes about it being an advertisement, or needing wikipediaizing, or having an inappropriate tone. However, I just immediately went back in, added a few links, and deleted their comment thingys…and viola! Totally “legitimate” article. To be honest, it now reads a lot more like it should, and is definitely less advertisy (though I tried to make it as neutral as possible to begin, and largely similar to the Fisher Price page that’s already up there).

The scary part comes in the fact that if it makes it for longer than 2 minutes without getting flagged, chances are that your new article will last for a very long time without being edited. This is especially true with marginal topics where the only people who really know what’s legitimate are the ones who know so much about said topic that they’ll never visit Wikipedia to read up on it.

Can I say it again, kids? Wikipedia is not a credible source. Might be good for quick info…or you might end up telling people that the Nigerian Banker guy really is legitimate after all. (Because, hey, Wikipedia says so!)

Comments (2)

Josh Smith said on 18-07-2007

I just checked and it looks like your article was deleted. I’m not totally sure why and couldn’t understand the crazy wiki shorthand stuff but – its definitely not there. It is funny, I was just thinking about how often I find myself searching stuff at Wikipedia – last time was Ladybird Johnson – I wanted to know what her real name was.

Wikipedia represents some of the best that the hive mind has to offer on the net – but yes, beware of Nigerian bankers – and apparently manufacturers of “durable American-made products for children and your home”
Andy said on 21-07-2007

Josh–

Haha! Yes, you’re right, my article seems to have been deleted. I’m working on figuring out why some 18-year-old from Florida thinks he has the authority to dictate who gets to write what on a communal resource. Maybe make some changes….but “Sorry, you’ve been nuked” is a bit severe.

Write a comment