http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19527797
Author Roth rebukes Wikipedia over Human Stain edit
Following the publication of the New Yorker letter, the Wikipedia
entry was changed and a section noting the debate inserted near its
end.
Has this been mentioned on any other mailing
On 8 September 2012 13:22, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
I noticed that the article makes the (very common) error/assumption
that administrators exercise some sort of editorial control, when (in
principle), it is editors that exercise editorial control (when the
editorial
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19527797
Author Roth rebukes Wikipedia over Human Stain edit
Following the publication of the New Yorker letter, the Wikipedia
entry was changed and a section noting the debate inserted near its
end.
Has this been mentioned on any other mailing
On 8 September 2012 13:22, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com
wrote:
I noticed that the article makes the (very common) error/assumption
that administrators exercise some sort of editorial control, when (in
principle), it is editors that exercise editorial control (when the
editorial
On 8 September 2012 13:48, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
That is the sort of thing that happens in a monarchy like England or
North Korea, idiots in charge... something that really pissed off George
Washington.
Fred, that's really an insanely stupid thing to post.
- d.
On 8 September 2012 14:16, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 September 2012 13:48, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
That is the sort of thing that happens in a monarchy like England or
North Korea, idiots in charge... something that really pissed off George
Washington.
Fred, you say Roth is an elderly man googling and I am wondering if
there
is an age at which people using Wikipedia in the estimation of this list
become unfit to drive?
Roth is an active writer and renowned, Nobel Prize finalist...right this
moment..to dismiss him as an elderly man
Fred, you say Roth is an elderly man googling and I am wondering if there
is an age at which people using Wikipedia in the estimation of this list
become unfit to drive?
Elderly or not, there is the issue of authentication. On the
internet, famously, nobody know you're a dog -- but nobody
I liked the promoted comment in the Ars Technica article:
http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/09/wikipedia-told-philip-roth-hes-not-credible-source-on-book-he-wrote/
(Found via the Reddit comments in
http://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia/comments/zim4r/philip_roth_an_open_letter_to_wikipedia_about/
Wow high and mighty much?
I haven't had chance to look into this; but I bet I know what I will
find. Someone being a bit of a jerk to him, which has led to having to
take this approach. Which is about rebutting Wikipedia rather than the
source which we cited.
Rather than whining about him we
On 8 September 2012 14:53, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
I'm older than he is. Roth is not the the first celebrity to think he
could dictate Wikipedia content. Michael Moore also felt he could throw
his weight around. And, no, I don't respect that move. Instead of
spending decades
We need to treat all subjects and potential subjects of articles with
respect and take their complaints seriously. An OTRS referral might have
helped. The material is not oversightable, but would fall within reports
of article errors.
Fred
...there is the issue of authentication. On the
No it doesn't.
I'll give you good odds on me being right.
Because I see the same thing week after week.
Tom Morton
On 8 Sep 2012, at 16:35, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 September 2012 15:43, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote:
I haven't had chance to look into
On 8 September 2012 16:55, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.comwrote:
No it doesn't.
I'll give you good odds on me being right.
Because I see the same thing week after week.
You mean leading author almost synonymous with rare interview assumes his
word is good enough for WP?
We've had a problem with courtesy for a long time; the entire internet
has. We're one of the few organizations that has made a concerted and
determined effort to address it, see
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/weekinreview/29cohen.html
Fred
No it doesn't.
I'll give you good odds on me
It's not a crazy train of thought though; people naturally feel they
are the authority on their own opinions.
We usually don't do brilliantly in explaining why that doesn't work.
Because we start with explaining reliable sources, and often glaze
over the most important bit.
I DO see these sorts
Really? An author wanting us to correct inaccuracy on article talking
about his inspiration for a book is bullying, trying to dictate
Wikipedia content, and is throwing his weight around?
If there's someone throwing their weight around here, look in the mirror
Wikipedia editors.
KTC
--
17 matches
Mail list logo
