Wikipedia imploft?

Als je, zoals Sam Vaknin, zes jaar lang Wikipedia hebt onderzocht dan is het logisch dat je er iets over wilt schrijven. En dat dit dan niet heel positief is…. ja dat is misschien ook wel logisch. Bij Global Politician een post met de volgende titel: The Six Sins of the Wikipedia.

It is a question of time before the Wikipedia self-destructs and implodes. It poses such low barriers to entry (anyone can edit any number of its articles) that it is already attracting masses of teenagers as “contributors” and “editors”, not to mention the less savory flotsam and jetsam of cyber-life. People who are regularly excluded or at least moderated in every other Internet community are welcomed, no questions asked, by this wannabe self-styled “encyclopedia”.

De volgende zonden worden omschreven:

  • The Wikipedia is opaque and encourages recklessness
  • The Wikipedia is anarchic, not democratic
  • The Might is Right Editorial Principle
  • Wikipedia is against real knowledge
  • Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia
  • The Wikipedia is rife with libel and violations of copyrights

Op sommige punten kan ik hem niet eens ongelijk geven.

Meer info: Global Politician
Via: Web2.0list

2 thoughts on “Wikipedia imploft?”

  1. Hallo, ten eerste is het me een grote troost om een lagelandtalige boek/info enthousiast te vinden die iets met cement heeft, lekker weinig wit op zijn pagina laat schitteren en nog een interessant genoeg om te beantwoorden soort postje serveert ook!


    Dan nu mijn eerste indruk:

    What an elitist moron. Too haughty and idiotic to realize he is applying the rules of phyzical contest with those of calm deliberate ripening of judgment (priority determination regarding application of adjustment powers last time i thought about it):

    “Postscript: The Wikipedians Fight Back

    This is the fifth essay I have written about the Wikipedia. A group of Wikipedians apparently decided to take revenge and/or to warn me off. They have authored a defamatory and slanderous article about “Sam Vaknin” in their “encyclopedia’. To leave no room for doubt, at the bottom of this new entry about me, they list all my articles against the Wikipedia.

    Additionally, I received an e-mail message from Brad Patrick, the Wikimedia’s General Counsel (attorney), asking me to copy him on all future correspondence with Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales, or anyone else associated with the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. Couldn’t be subtler. I declined his “request”.”

    Oh damn, he sits with tripod too!!!! Sees himself as an expert on narcissism but not a prof “I am NOT a mental health professional” .. . .no of course not, none of them are obsessively single track minded enough to be lumped with them lot, right, mr vankin?

Comments are closed.

WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :