[kam30en]

BULLSH*T!!! Wikipedia is the height of human achievement. Never have humans had access to soo much knowledge soo quickly. And what are you saying about 10 or 20 years.... the internet will be as dead as the dinosaurs once TSHTF... The amount of energy the internet uses is incredible. Most sites now pay for all this energy with ad-space which will all wither away, even in a slow collapse. Wkipedia is like man landing on the moon, another one of man's great achievements that will never be matched in all of mans future. And unlike man landing on the moon, wikipedia is actually useful, I surf on wikipedia for at least half an hour everyday learning useful things I otherwise never would have learned. Shit, I've learned more on wikipedia than I ever did in school.

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kam30en', 'T')he amount of energy the internet uses is incredible. Most sites now pay for all this energy with ad-space which will all wither away, even in a slow collapse.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kam30en', 'W')ikipedia is the height of human achievement. Never have humans had access to soo much knowledge soo quickly.

[JustinFrankl]

The problem with wikipedia is that it only works in practice. In theory, it can't possibly work.

[Taskforce_Unity]

Wikipedia has a better quality then other encyclopedia according to comparison research.

Open Source delivers better quality then closed source due to the sheer number of people that work on it.

[meekoil]

"Consensus is not a fact based exercise"

-"Shades of Truth"- No Substance - Bad Religion

[bboyjiji]

i think the original poster is having worries that if we invest too much confidence in the validity of wikipedia, even if it's the best we got, then our psychological reality will be distorted by an eternal faceless dictator, zeitgeist! we can argue with the publishers of brittanica over facts, but who would dare go against the indisputable public "fact"? Is wikipedia some kind of neofacist organization. They get an awful lot from donations and they make not secret out of that! Something is fishy!!

[Etalon]

As I see it, if I do use wikipedia, its just a starting point for further research in the subject.

It shouldnt be used on its own.

[Concerned]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('meekoil', '"')Consensus is not a fact based exercise"

[FairMaiden]

If Wiki doesn't have anything to do with consensus, than its main benefit that the wisdom of the crowd will get you reliable information is blown out of the water. You merely get information from the last anonymous person who edited it!

Sadly, I do know MANY ppl who think Wiki is a correct and accurate source of information. Other "encyclopedias" have been a trusted source of information in the past, so Wiki gets the same unwarranted respect. I don't blame Wiki for this tho - I blame the last generation that didn't teach its children, "don't believe everything you read on the internet"...the way my parents generation taught us, "dont' believe everything you see on TV."

[entropyfails]

Seriously people... you can get the entire edit history for every single wiki page.

If your topic has any possibility of having controversy, simply view the changes and you'll find out all sides of any particular position.

Wikipedia simply knows more about more things than any one human can ever hope to. That doesn't mean every edit is perfect, hence you should weigh the evidence you find in the revision history.

Let's predict the end of USENET because people from AOL can post while we are at it... *laugh* That was a good old time.

A word to the wise, just because you can use a technology doesn't mean that you have any understanding of it. *grin*

[shakespear1]

Jan1 is a wonder around day and I had the chance to see the following post after being intersted in fairness issue with regard Wikipedia material.

It appears that there is a committee which JUDGES what can or can not appear. You be the judge on the issue of fairness as posed in the following forum.

I would start by reading the following post

$this->bbcode_second_pass_code('', ' Pat Jaress

post Yesterday, 07:42 PM

Charles Matthews and the other four panel members representing Wikipedia voted for to ban editor RPJ from the publication because: [Editor] RPJ regularly cites information from unreliable sites dedicated to a propagandistic point of view, one is spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk, . . . .”

Matthews and the other four panel members of Wikipedia need to retract that finding of fact because it is not true. ')

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index ... 8861&st=60

My "attach link" widget does not work

[steam_cannon]

Spammer Problem!

http://www.peakoil.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page


The page header of the peak wiki section keeps getting edited by a spammer putting in links to junk. I'm thinking of eventually adding some wiki content, so I keep tabs on this page. Moderators, please fix it!

[steam_cannon]

Nevermind, Nevermind, I figured out how to fix that problem...

[steam_cannon]

Errr the spam bot came back again!!! I deleted the junk again, but it's still a problem...

[steam_cannon]

Just a reminder about peak wiki, adding content is more fun then removing spam.





A few options to consider...
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]ConfirmEdit

Install the ConfirmEdit extension. ConfirmEdit uses captchas (simple
tests to "prove" an editor is human before registering an account or
allowing certain types of edits) to prevent many spam robots from
inserting spam into a wiki.

You can use "fancy" image captchas with squiggly letters, the kind
everyone is used to seeing these days, or you can opt to use
simple math problems. The image-based captchas present problems
for blind people, but it's probably easier to write a spam robot to
detect and do math problems, so there's a tradeoff. I use the math
problems on UMassWiki for maximum accessibility. They're very
simple addition and subtraction only.

http://wiki.evernex.com/index.php?title ... _Mediawiki

_____________________________________________________

Extension:ConfirmEdit
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ConfirmEdit

_____________________________________________________

Stemming the menace of wiki spamming
http://www.linux.com/feature/45848

[RedStateGreen]

I'm finding several pages where it doesn't let you edit. It may be that the page is too big or something, that's the error I get. I tried reverting to a clean page, but it won't allow that either. Looking at the history it's like I wasn't even there.

I'm not sure if it's an error in the code or something wrong with my log-in. Or something one of the spammers did.

[steam_cannon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RedStateGreen', 'I')'m finding several pages where it doesn't let you edit.
It may be that the page is too big or something...

[memills]

I have set up a wiki to help organize and summarize peak oil preparation information (which otherwise
is hard to find because it is spread out over many different posts).
Please consider volunteering your time and expertise at: PeakOilPreparation.com

[like_the_dinosaurs]

Great idea. This an area where our family is trying to upgrade. We have gathered all of a reading material relevent to PO and the next thing on the list to start printing the vast amount of material on PO.

Cheers