bobbartop
bobbartop
Joined: Mar 15, 2016
  • Threads: 109
  • Posts: 2267
April 23rd, 2019 at 9:17:52 PM permalink
"Steve" on Wiki, 3 million edits, 35,000 original articles. Omg. Get. A. Life.

And how much was he paid? Squat. Zip. Zero. Nada. The guy does it for free. lmao

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meet-the-man-behind-a-third-of-whats-on-wikipedia/
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 97
  • Posts: 13917
April 23rd, 2019 at 9:54:34 PM permalink
Quote: bobbartop

"Steve" on Wiki, 3 million edits, 35,000 original articles. Omg. Get. A. Life.

And how much was he paid? Squat. Zip. Zero. Nada. The guy does it for free. lmao

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/meet-the-man-behind-a-third-of-whats-on-wikipedia/



As a volunteer here, I don't understand your attitude about this. Wiki is an amazing collaboration, and nearly everyone who contributes is unpaid. Why not appreciate the depth of the guy's commitment?
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
RS
RS
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 8615
Thanks for this post from:
Mintyodiousgambit
April 23rd, 2019 at 10:16:33 PM permalink
I agree with babs on this one. Don't make fun of the guy because he's doing something that (AFAICT) is helpful to everyone. Sounds like he's pretty damn smart and good at researching stuff and I assume he enjoys doing it.

I wonder how he'd fare on Jeopardy. Probably better than BBB and Wizard. :) :)

I don't like writing it as "Jeopardy!" because that's stupid to have an exclamation point (mark?) in the title.
01000101 01110000 01110011 01110100 01100101 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100100 01101001 01100100 01101110 00100111 01110100 00100000 01101011 01101001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01101000 01101001 01101101 01110011 01100101 01101100 01100110 00101110
bobbartop
bobbartop
Joined: Mar 15, 2016
  • Threads: 109
  • Posts: 2267
April 24th, 2019 at 2:19:57 AM permalink
Quote: RS

I agree with babs on this one. Don't make fun of the guy because he's doing something that (AFAICT) is helpful to everyone. Sounds like he's pretty damn smart and good at researching stuff and I assume he enjoys doing it.



Don't you recognize a slant? Is Wiki gospel? I think there's a whole generation that believes it is gospel. No wonder we're so screwed up. Communist professors teaching higher "education", and "Steve". We're doomed.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 219
  • Posts: 11122
April 24th, 2019 at 2:38:58 AM permalink
Some people have their weird place in life. I can't see making that your life unless you are both rich and bored. But each his own.
Tolerance is the virtue of believing in nothing
bobbartop
bobbartop
Joined: Mar 15, 2016
  • Threads: 109
  • Posts: 2267
April 24th, 2019 at 3:03:05 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Some people have their weird place in life.



Yeah, his is at his parents' house.

How about you, AZD? Do you see the liberal slant of Wiki, as I do? And the damage from a whole generation treating it as gospel?
odiousgambit
odiousgambit 
Joined: Nov 9, 2009
  • Threads: 293
  • Posts: 8133
April 24th, 2019 at 3:26:27 AM permalink
wikipedia is very good on scientific and other technical topics, just beware of pop culture topics, politics, and the like. As far as a liberal slant, it's vulnerable depending on contributors, but I see no reason to particularly cite it.

if you make a contribution it may be something you will leave behind for others long after you are gone

I will quickly fix a typo but can't quite make myself contribute much; some of what little I did is still there.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 217
  • Posts: 5581
April 24th, 2019 at 3:34:16 AM permalink
When working on my film project Dark Oz there was an incorrect fact mentioned by a newspaper

IMDB prided itself on only using "sourced" facts while everyone condemned Wikipedia because anyone can change or edit the facts.

The idea being the whole of humanity will police itself.

End result:

I successfully changed the wrong info on Wikipedia while IMDB refused my changes citing the newspaper published report as correct

So to this day IMDB with its vetted system has the WRONG info while Wikipedia has the correct info
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
RS
RS
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 8615
Thanks for this post from:
odiousgambit
April 24th, 2019 at 5:38:01 AM permalink
Quote: bobbartop

Don't you recognize a slant? Is Wiki gospel? I think there's a whole generation that believes it is gospel. No wonder we're so screwed up. Communist professors teaching higher "education", and "Steve". We're doomed.


If you're talking about political slant, I have no idea. I rarely read wikipedia when it comes to stuff that is or may be political. Like odiousgambit mentioned, I mostly just use it for trying to get a brief understanding of something I'm not familiar about. It's a good starting point when learning about a new subject. As far as I can tell, I can't remember reading anything on wikipedia that has an obvious political slant.
01000101 01110000 01110011 01110100 01100101 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100100 01101001 01100100 01101110 00100111 01110100 00100000 01101011 01101001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01101000 01101001 01101101 01110011 01100101 01101100 01100110 00101110
Minty
Minty
Joined: Jan 23, 2015
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 341
April 24th, 2019 at 6:11:43 AM permalink
There's a whole community of people dedicated to fixing the errors on Wikipedia. Happens on other sites too, like Ancestry. I kind of look at it as an achievement to have curated such a large amount of information. I'm guessing some of it is internalized, and any learning is a good thing! What I'd be more interested in, is how many people benefitted from his edits? Thousands? Millions?

I always thought not being able to is Wikipedia as a source was a bit silly, but somewhat understandable. Lots of friends used the sources Wikipedia cited, and I see no issue in that.
"Favorable bets are called 'investments.' Unfavorable bets constitute 'gambling.' -William Poundstone quoting John Kelly Jr. in Fortune's Formula

  • Jump to: