Wikipedia

Laugh it up...
User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30468
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Wikipedia

Postby Gord » Sat May 05, 2012 2:57 am

I have a "dynamic IP address" apparently, and I just got this message from Wikipedia:

User talk:74.216.92.164

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Difference between revisions)

Latest revision as of 16:22, 23 October 2009 (edit)
NellieBly(talk | contribs)
(Message re. Irish Civil War (HG))

Latest revision as of 16:22, 23 October 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Irish Civil War has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive.

Bla Bla Noe one cares so waterver well heres the info

:mrgreen: I didn't do it!

Ahhhhh, I hate Wikipedia.... :lol:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Monster
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5155
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:57 pm
Location: Tarrytown, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Wikipedia

Postby Monster » Sat May 05, 2012 3:43 am

I quit editing Wikipedia. I hate to spend time writing something and someone else just throws it away.
Listening twice as much as you speak is a sign of wisdom.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30468
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Wikipedia

Postby Gord » Sat May 05, 2012 5:36 am

I hate it when the uncorrect my spelling corrections.

And I don't mean things like American vs. English spelling; I mean things like "irregardless" and "undefrost." :lol:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Wikipedia

Postby xouper » Sat May 05, 2012 5:56 am

Monster wrote:I quit editing Wikipedia. I hate to spend time writing something and someone else just throws it away.

Same here.

I also despise the snot-nosed high school hall monitors who sniveled their way into a position of semi-authority at wikipedia and the power went to their heads.

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12867
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Wikipedia

Postby JO 753 » Sat May 05, 2012 6:48 am

If you know sumthing about a subject, you will almost certainly find errorz in the Wiki article about it.

If you are a true authority on a subject, sumwun who haz actually produced significant work, you dont get to rite the Wiki article bekuz it woud be 'biased'!

I went thru their BS with Nooalf article, wich got 'merged' into the spelling reform article and then progressively minimized. If you get on the bad side uv wun uv the snot noze trust fund punks, he or she will just outlast you bekuz they got nothing better to do.

User avatar
fromthehills
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9890
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:01 am
Location: Woostone

Re: Wikipedia

Postby fromthehills » Sat May 05, 2012 11:24 am

I wrote some Search and Rescue suggestions on Crestone Peak page, how to be prepared, what to look for, how long they're going to wait on rescue if they do get hurt or lost. Deleted for bias, when the rest of the article basically says, "Dude, it's cool", so it wasn't as if I was inserting my opinion into a scientific study of the place.

Wow, most of the article has been deleted, since, but they let someone's climbing suggestions through. Luckily, they mention the danger, somewhat.

I wonder if it's trust funders, or people that work TSA and maître d jobs.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Wikipedia

Postby xouper » Sat May 05, 2012 11:36 am

fromthehills wrote:I wrote some Search and Rescue suggestions on Crestone Peak page, how to be prepared, what to look for, how long they're going to wait on rescue if they do get hurt or lost. Deleted for bias, when the rest of the article basically says, "Dude, it's cool", so it wasn't as if I was inserting my opinion into a scientific study of the place.

Wow, most of the article has been deleted, since, but they let someone's climbing suggestions through. Luckily, they mention the danger, somewhat.

I wonder if it's trust funders, or people that work TSA and maître d jobs.

Following standard wikipedia procedure, I would delete the whole article for lack of citations for any of the claims. :roll:

Oh wait, two of the claims in the right-hand sidebar are sourced, the elevation and the coordinates. Other than that, the entire article is mere unsubstantiated opinion.

How do we even know the photo is the correct peak? Why should we take the word of Adam Ginsburg?

User avatar
fromthehills
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9890
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:01 am
Location: Woostone

Re: Wikipedia

Postby fromthehills » Sat May 05, 2012 11:59 am

xouper wrote:
fromthehills wrote:I wrote some Search and Rescue suggestions on Crestone Peak page, how to be prepared, what to look for, how long they're going to wait on rescue if they do get hurt or lost. Deleted for bias, when the rest of the article basically says, "Dude, it's cool", so it wasn't as if I was inserting my opinion into a scientific study of the place.

Wow, most of the article has been deleted, since, but they let someone's climbing suggestions through. Luckily, they mention the danger, somewhat.

I wonder if it's trust funders, or people that work TSA and maître d jobs.

Following standard wikipedia procedure, I would delete the whole article for lack of citations for any of the claims. :roll:

Oh wait, two of the claims in the right-hand sidebar are sourced, the elevation and the coordinates. Other than that, the entire article is mere unsubstantiated opinion.

How do we even know the photo is the correct peak? Why should we take the word of Adam Ginsburg?


I can verify it by looking out the window, you'd have to take my word for it, though. :D

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10827
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Wikipedia

Postby xouper » Sat May 05, 2012 12:19 pm

fromthehills wrote:
xouper wrote:How do we even know the photo is the correct peak? Why should we take the word of Adam Ginsburg?

I can verify it by looking out the window, you'd have to take my word for it, though. :D

You may (or maybe not) be interested in what Lance Kennedy recently said about expert eyewitness testimony:

In another thread, Lance Kennedy wrote:Not wanting to be nasty, but I think that reliance on Iranian pilots as "expert" testimony is close to scraping the bottom of the barrel.

. . . I remember a certain astronaut who went off the rails claiming special religious inspiration due to what happened to him in space. We know cosmic radiation has a neural effect. So he went off the rails. Being an astronaut did not stop him being just plain loco.

The same applies to pilots. A pilot may be smart, and a good observer. Or he/she can be an idiot, and a total lunatic at interpreting what he/she saw. Just like the rest of humanity.

So, your observational testimony is being dismissed peremptorily because some astronaut went off the rails and thus you too are only human and might be a total lunatic at interpreting what you saw.

Better luck next time. :P

User avatar
fromthehills
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9890
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:01 am
Location: Woostone

Re: Wikipedia

Postby fromthehills » Sat May 05, 2012 12:26 pm

xouper wrote:
fromthehills wrote:
xouper wrote:How do we even know the photo is the correct peak? Why should we take the word of Adam Ginsburg?

I can verify it by looking out the window, you'd have to take my word for it, though. :D

You may (or maybe not) be interested in what Lance Kennedy recently said about expert eyewitness testimony:

In another thread, Lance Kennedy wrote:Not wanting to be nasty, but I think that reliance on Iranian pilots as "expert" testimony is close to scraping the bottom of the barrel.

. . . I remember a certain astronaut who went off the rails claiming special religious inspiration due to what happened to him in space. We know cosmic radiation has a neural effect. So he went off the rails. Being an astronaut did not stop him being just plain loco.

The same applies to pilots. A pilot may be smart, and a good observer. Or he/she can be an idiot, and a total lunatic at interpreting what he/she saw. Just like the rest of humanity.

So, your observational testimony is being dismissed peremptorily because some astronaut went off the rails and thus you too are only human and might be a total lunatic at interpreting what you saw.

Better luck next time. :P


I was just reading that, and thinking the same thing. :lol: Though my ethnic background may buy me some points back. :roll:

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 20885
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Wikipedia

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat May 05, 2012 3:39 pm

I can't even figure out how to edit a page.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Austin Harper
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5021
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Wikipedia

Postby Austin Harper » Mon May 07, 2012 4:16 pm

Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.


Return to “The Funny Pages”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest