wikipedia - Gizmodo

posts about #wikipedia more →
Wikipedia's Brain Drain
WikiReader Puts Wikipedia in Your Pocket, Forgets We're in 2009
Cyclopedia Augmented Reality iPhone App Drenches Your World In Wikipedia
The Week In iPhone Apps: FCC Inquiry Edition
Obama's BlackBerry: No Wonder He Couldn't Let Go
RIP Microsoft Encarta, 1993-2009
The Biggest Advances in Governmental Tech During the Bush Era
If Wikipedia Was a Professor, College Would Be Awesome [Citation Needed]
Dispute Over Model Train Control Software Just Became a Landmark Open-Source Copyright Case
Take a Peek Under the Hood as Firefox Renders Websites Visually

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

Coolmodo
11/23/09

In reply to Wikipedia's Brain Drain
Funny, they implement more regulation of contributions and people don't want to write for Wikipedia anymore.

Shows you they all wanted to spam, lie and write BS from the start.

Douchebag writers IMO.
Reply

Coolmodo was starred Coolmodo was unstarred

Platypus Man
11/23/09

In reply to Wikipedia's Brain Drain
Once you get used to the rules used on Wikipedia, editing on it isn't bad. I don't edit nearly as much as I do, and it does get frustrating sometimes, but that's just how Wikipedia is sometimes.

If you want to add stuff to the Internet, make a blog. Yeah, valid stuff gets removed immediately sometimes because of little issues and complete fabrications can stay on there for years, but that's just how Wikipedia is. If you don't like it, you don't have to edit it and you don't have to use it.

Which is what looks like is happening...
Reply

Platypus Man was starred Platypus Man was unstarred

blash
11/23/09

In reply to Wikipedia's Brain Drain
I do note the "English" wikipedia part - since there are a good deal of articles that still need to be translated.
Reply

blash was starred blash was unstarred

Hello Mister Walrus
11/23/09

In reply to Wikipedia's Brain Drain
This might be against the "non-profit" spirit of Wikipedia, but maybe it's time to, you know, pay more people to edit articles? If you open up a Wikipedia article now, there's a donation bar that leads to a goal of $7.5 million. This seems like a pathetically low number for a website with Wikipedia's readership. Maybe they should sell some ads and use the $$$ to reduce their dependence on volunteers.

Or I could be forgetting some important factor that nullifies this argument. The fact that ad revenue exists, for instance, might drive away volunteers. Then again, plenty of people spend time commenting on for-profit websites anyway...
Reply

ddhboy
11/23/09

@Hello Mister Walrus: They can't run ads because then it would break their non profit status. You think the IRS wouldn't go rushing into wikimedia for that 7.5 million they've set aside for Wikipedia. Plus it could threaten their neutrality. If EA sees an article they don't like, they could threaten wikipedia to remove the article or portions of it, or they pull their advertising.
Reply

jepzilla promoted this comment ddhboy was starred ddhboy was unstarred

frigg
11/23/09

@Hello Mister Walrus: I'd never comment on a for-profit website.
Reply

frigg was starred frigg was unstarred

jepzilla
11/23/09

@ddhboy: Running ads wouldn't threaten their non-profit status. There are lots of non-profits with substantial revenue generating operations... hell IKEA is famously a non-profit. But I agree with you that it would threaten their neutrality.
Reply

jepzilla was starred jepzilla was unstarred

ddhboy
11/23/09

@frigg: You mean like Gizmodo?
Reply

frigg promoted this comment ddhboy was starred ddhboy was unstarred

pettiblay
11/23/09

@ddhboy: ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED: "You got the joke"

10 Gamerscore
Reply

frigg promoted this comment pettiblay was starred pettiblay was unstarred

frigg
11/23/09

@ddhboy: Zactly!
Reply

frigg was starred frigg was unstarred

fleebailey33
11/23/09

In reply to Wikipedia's Brain Drain
and google has been counting on this for the same reason knol still exists
Reply

fleebailey33 was starred fleebailey33 was unstarred

HurtsSoGood
11/23/09

In reply to Wikipedia's Brain Drain
1. Wikipedia is a mature site, and most of the articles have already been written. Thus, the powers that be (TM) can focus more on quality over quantity.

2. If Wikipedia did not have those onerous regulations in place, chaos would ensue. Erroneous and potentially slanderous information would remain in place for extended periods of time, sullying Wikipedia's hard-earned reputation and opening that organization up to lawsuits.

Fewer editors, fewer changes to factcheck, fewer new articles to approve. It was inevitable.
Reply

HurtsSoGood was starred HurtsSoGood was unstarred

Michai
11/23/09

In reply to Wikipedia's Brain Drain
Obviously it will decline. As the number of validated entries grows, the number of entries needing editing decline. There is only so much information to be edited. I'm not too worried, eventually it will become a mostly static encyclopedia that updates/expands on preexisting entries with new statistics or information.
Reply

Michai was starred Michai was unstarred

bipedalprimate
11/23/09

@Michai: Really? I've always theorized that it would eventually integrate with Facebook, until everyone is an article linked to their jobs, hometown, softball team, etc. The information that can be edited is pretty vast if you're willing to nitpick.
Reply

Michai promoted this comment bipedalprimate was starred bipedalprimate was unstarred

Michai
11/23/09

@bipedalprimate: Most people on the social networking sites tend to have their accounts blocked from third parties. This enables them some ambiguity, but its that trend that I am highlighting. More and more people are trying to hide their information online from the general public. I think, that albeit an interesting idea, society is not yet comfortable with having complete articles written either by or for them. Nonetheless, you do make an interesting point regarding web integration. Its not hard to imagine one day in the not too distant future a Web Browser/Web Portal that contains an entire social network and quicklinks the webs most used services and media, all in one neat little package. Google would love to accomplish this, but I think it will be a competitor/innovator we have yet to see.
Reply

Michai was starred Michai was unstarred

met2art
11/23/09

In reply to Wikipedia's Brain Drain
Well, I looked up "Fading Enthusiasm for Wikipedia" on Wikipedia, and it said "Tom is a dick. No Dave is. No, Tom, you're a dick and I Googled your mom last night. [Article Locked]"

So, I'm not really sure what to take away from this experience.
Reply

met2art was starred met2art was unstarred

Nathan Obbards
11/23/09

@met2art: ''The accuracy of this article is disputed. Some editors feel that Tom and Dave are both dicks. Click here for the disambiguation.''
Reply

Nathan Obbards was starred Nathan Obbards was unstarred

Kaiser-Machead
11/23/09

In reply to Wikipedia's Brain Drain
I imagine some are also disheartened somewhat to see their input re-edited and cut up because it's felt that they were not being "relevant" to the subject. If I wrote a long paragraph in detail about something I knew to be accurate, only to come back to find much or all of it disappear, I'd probably not contribute anymore.
Reply

Kaiser-Machead was starred Kaiser-Machead was unstarred

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis
11/23/09

@Kaiser-Machead: Or, even better. come back and find out that their PR department or some political aid has edited it...
Reply

nutbastard
10/13/09

In reply to WikiReader Puts Wikipedia in Your Pocket, Forgets We're in 2009
i run wiki2touch on my ipod touch - it's *wonderful*

you have to jailbreak, and installation is a bit wonky, but once you get it all going properly, it's almost flawless, minus lack of pictures. you use safari to browse so that's always nice, and all the links between articles work.

it's nice for those who have touches and not iphones. oh and the dump takes up ~4gb so i wouldn't recommend doing it on a 8GB touch.
Reply

nutbastard was starred nutbastard was unstarred

Slack3r78
10/13/09

In reply to WikiReader Puts Wikipedia in Your Pocket, Forgets We're in 2009
Hey, look, everybody, OpenMoko's doing something that makes no sense, but is focused on cramming OSS places in an awkward fashion. Imagine that.
Reply

Slack3r78 was starred Slack3r78 was unstarred

OCEntertainment
10/13/09

In reply to WikiReader Puts Wikipedia in Your Pocket, Forgets We're in 2009
"Fun fact: it was designed by Thomas Meyerhoffer, who ...helped design the Chumby"

Yeah. I can see that.
Reply

OCEntertainment was starred OCEntertainment was unstarred

GitEmSteveDave_ForgotNametag
10/13/09

In reply to WikiReader Puts Wikipedia in Your Pocket, Forgets We're in 2009
Needs "Don't Panic" written on it somewhere.
Reply

MostlyHarmless
10/13/09

@GitEmSteveDave_GotOff2HoursEar...: Yeah. I'd buy it if it had "Don't Panic" written on it in large reassuring words.
Reply

MostlyHarmless was starred MostlyHarmless was unstarred

GitEmSteveDave_ForgotNametag
10/13/09

@MostlyHarmless: I prefer large, friendly letters.
Reply

Michai
10/13/09

In reply to WikiReader Puts Wikipedia in Your Pocket, Forgets We're in 2009
At $99 you can pick up a used GPS with more features and funtionality. I personally hate all e-reader inspired gadgets. They will never bridge the gap between smart phones, laptops, and tablets. E-Readers/Ink = Epic-market failure.
Reply

Michai was starred Michai was unstarred

pantsonfireliarliar
10/13/09

@Michai: Wait there are GPSs that have wikipedia built-in? I'd like to have a GPS that reads wikipedia entries of local landmarks as I drive by them.

Oh and e-ink is a massive failure for anyone who doesn't read books.
Reply

Slack3r78 promoted this comment Edited by pantsonfireliarliar at 10/13/09 9:40 AM

Michai
10/13/09

@pantsonfireliarliar: On the contrary I do read "Books".
Reply

Michai was starred Michai was unstarred

Michai
10/13/09

@pantsonfireliarliar: "At $99 you can pick up a used GPS with more features and funtionality".

I'm sorry where do you see "GPSs that have Wikipedia built-in?"

There are many GPS/Media players with more features as well as the ability to browse the web.
Reply

Michai was starred Michai was unstarred

pantsonfireliarliar
10/13/09

@Michai: I wasn't being sarcastic about that point, I'd really actually buy a $99 GPS with wikipedia built-in. (But seeing as how it was a post about a $99 WikiReader, there'd be no relevant point to posting about a $99 GPS unless it had something to do with Wikipedia.)
Reply

chefgon
10/13/09

In reply to WikiReader Puts Wikipedia in Your Pocket, Forgets We're in 2009
I would have adored this thing in 1998.
Reply

Slack3r78 promoted this comment chefgon was starred chefgon was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

Gizmodo Team

SUBSCRIBE TO Gizmodo

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment