Sad for seeing you so disappointed. Good to see you have insight in butterflies. So I hope you will make your knowledge visible on dewp, where neither genera so far have found its way into articles. enwp (together with viwp!) has at least the genus "Jameela" as an article.

That aside, is it really a disaster that svwp relies on scientific texts that was unquestioned until three years ago? I think maybe there are more pressing concerns in the development of our wikipedias.

Best of wishes,
Paracel63 at svwp

2013-06-17, 22:29, skrev Kurt Kulac:

i don´t want to repeat all those arguments already quoted (lennard
already mentioned achim raschkas criticism, which i fully agree with),
since what happend, already happend, and will unstoppably happen in the
future.  but i would say first of all the strategic goal is not to
contribute hundreds of mistakes a day. just to take the 1 millionth
article Erysichton elaborata: after an advice on the talk page a HUMAN
added, that the species is probably synonymized with Erysichton palmyra.
so far, so good. but even this correction is not enough. in 2010 the
genus erysichton was redefined and a new genus, jameela was described.
both taxa now desrcibed as in sv.wikipedia are invalid.

so just concerning this tiny tiny group of articles, there is already a
bunch of mistakes, the bot copied out of outdated databases. wouldn´t be
a big deal, if somebody mentioned that the articles sticked to the old
view. but that´s something a bot can´t handle. so how reliable is the
rest of the articles?

a bot can be a convenient helper for authors, who know, how to handle
it, as it seems has happened with the creation of the articles about
swedish lakes (i´m no expert with that though). but it is a desastrous
tool for our whole movement, if you create hundreds of thousands (!)
articles, without the slightest idea, how to handle the contradictions,
that will appear doubtlessly?

it´s a sad thing, that you mention quality and this action in one

truly utterly disappointed encyclopedic greetings,

Wikimedia-l mailing list
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Reply via email to