On 1 Jul 2006 at 10:09, Carl Dershem wrote: > Kim Patrick Clow wrote: > > > Carl Dershem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I know people whose Wikipedia biographies have been repeatedly > > hacked and changed by asocials. > > > > Could you provide some names or samples? > > Harlan Ellison
Looks like a very interesting history, and most of it revolves around Ellison's own objections to the article for not using his own press release copy. See the history in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Harlan_Ellison Neutral Point of View is an essential part of the Wikipedia, and Ellison seems to me to not want an article that doesn't take sides. But the discussion and the history is all there, including the publication of Ellison's own response to the article. What's not to like about this article? How in the world could this rich text be in any way inferior to a printed encyclopedia? > . . . and Ben Bova, for two examples. This is a very short article, with almost no discussion history. I checked some of the history but don't see anything in the way of a massive revision of text, nor any evidence of controversy. The article seems completely matter-of-fact and factual. I don't think either of your examples point out any flaws in the Wikipedia. In fact, the Ellison examples shows just how much better Wikipedia is in providing rich insight into a subject than a mere printed encyclopedia could ever be. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
