With all due respect both to your good self, and to the facts of the
matter, the entry survived until the author withdrew it.
And furthermore, every word in the entry was true, so there would have
been no cause for a review panel to delete it.
As the said author, I am deeply distressed at the suggestion that the
article was "bullshit", and will have to have another measure of Bowmore
before I retire.
John
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:10:15 -0000, Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 23 Jan 2006 at 14:00, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Believe none of what you hear, half of what you read, and most of what
you
see ...
The fact that someone on this list posted a bullshit entry to Wikipedia
(something about Theriaultian photography, IIRC) makes me very
skeptical of
anything I read in Wikipedia.
And how long did it last after is was subjected to review (it's in the
history
but I couldn't be bothered searching for it)? Articles must pass a peer
review
system and for each article there is also a public discussion list. If a
currently published article is in doubt, needs more information or
professional
review there will be a notification as such at the head of the article.
The Tom Cruise entry has been amended thousands of times and hopefully
will
continue to be added to and corrected for accuracy.
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
