Took a good one earlier today :P

Message

ofblong · #31 Unread post by **ofblong** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:27 am

-Holiday wrote:
Nalian wrote:
ofblong wrote:
Johnj wrote:This is Travis Pastrana.
another gay wiki post. Show me something that is cold hard truth like an official website and I might believe wiki then for now wiki is maybe 70% truth and 30% false.

an example of something true.

http://expn.go.com/mtx/pastrana/
You do realize that that wikipedia page links to 9 sites where that information is garnered from, including the same website (not the exact link) you provided?

Sure some wikipedia pages need sources cited, but it says that. Follow the links that provide the information if you doubt the article, and use the report button if you think its false.
OH BURN!

wasnt a burn but rather a poor attempt at saying wiki is the shiznit. Wiki is good for somethings but I have found many times that it has incorrect and false information.

Wed Mar 21, 2007 2:19 am

You mean when suddenly during the history of the battle of gettysburg they mention alien abductions and that General Lee had antenae?

No, I believe it to be true!

Yeah, of course it isn't perfect because anyone can post to it. However, it's created the bigger almost accurate encyclopedia ever. Those little nitwits that try coming to the door to cell britanicas? Thing of the past man, thing of the past.

-Holiday · #33 Unread post by **-Holiday** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 2:46 am

ofblong wrote:
-Holiday wrote:
Nalian wrote:
ofblong wrote:
Johnj wrote:This is Travis Pastrana.
another gay wiki post. Show me something that is cold hard truth like an official website and I might believe wiki then for now wiki is maybe 70% truth and 30% false.

an example of something true.

http://expn.go.com/mtx/pastrana/
You do realize that that wikipedia page links to 9 sites where that information is garnered from, including the same website (not the exact link) you provided?

Sure some wikipedia pages need sources cited, but it says that. Follow the links that provide the information if you doubt the article, and use the report button if you think its false.
OH BURN!
wasnt a burn but rather a poor attempt at saying wiki is the shiznit. Wiki is good for somethings but I have found many times that it has incorrect and false information.

I think all she said was that wikipedia is, well, a wiki. In that it is a wiki, of course some of the information is false. That is why you need to check the references. It's not encyclopedia.com, its wikipedia.com. It is a live document, a collaborative effort, and anyone can write whatever they want there.

So pointing out that some of the info is incorrect is like pointing out that shoes.com sells shoes.

Nalian · #34 Unread post by **Nalian** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 2:55 am

ofblong wrote:wasnt a burn but rather a poor attempt at saying wiki is the shiznit. Wiki is good for somethings but I have found many times that it has incorrect and false information.

Keep your words out of my mouth - I never said any such thing.

You claimed that wikipedia was gay and 70% wrong, then gave the same website that wikipedia did. If you don't see the irony there then there's no point in saying anything more.

Johnj · #35 Unread post by **Johnj** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 4:13 am

-Holiday wrote:
ofblong wrote:
-Holiday wrote:
Nalian wrote:
ofblong wrote:
Johnj wrote:This is Travis Pastrana.
another gay wiki post. Show me something that is cold hard truth like an official website and I might believe wiki then for now wiki is maybe 70% truth and 30% false.

an example of something true.

http://expn.go.com/mtx/pastrana/
You do realize that that wikipedia page links to 9 sites where that information is garnered from, including the same website (not the exact link) you provided?

Sure some wikipedia pages need sources cited, but it says that. Follow the links that provide the information if you doubt the article, and use the report button if you think its false.
OH BURN!
wasnt a burn but rather a poor attempt at saying wiki is the shiznit. Wiki is good for somethings but I have found many times that it has incorrect and false information.
I think all she said was that wikipedia is, well, a wiki. In that it is a wiki, of course some of the information is false. That is why you need to check the references. It's not encyclopedia.com, its wikipedia.com. It is a live document, a collaborative effort, and anyone can write whatever they want there.

So pointing out that some of the info is incorrect is like pointing out that shoes.com sells shoes.

This is gay.

Wed Mar 21, 2007 4:42 am

And pride

ofblong · #37 Unread post by **ofblong** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 5:32 pm

Nalian wrote:
ofblong wrote:wasnt a burn but rather a poor attempt at saying wiki is the shiznit. Wiki is good for somethings but I have found many times that it has incorrect and false information.
Keep your words out of my mouth - I never said any such thing.

You claimed that wikipedia was gay and 70% wrong, then gave the same website that wikipedia did. If you don't see the irony there then there's no point in saying anything more.

sorry but I didnt site that website from wiki. If it happens to be on the wiki page then fine no biggie but I certainly didnt look at the wiki page to find that site. The only reason I dont like to site wiki in places like this is because of the potention of misinformation like the gettysburg address was abducted by aliens lol. I am not saying to anyone they shouldnt use wiki as I agree its a good source of info but no one should rely only on wiki. If you read a wiki page then you need to also look elsewhere (3 or 4 other places if possible) to make sure you have the correct info. That is the reason there are high schools/colleges etc etc that are banning the citing of wiki/use of wiki on any term papers that are required. Students are taking it as fact when it may not be. I would think college students would know better than to use just wiki but hey not everyone is a bright cookie i guess. as for 70% your right I dont know why I said 70%.. its more like 10% lol.

Britjoe · #38 Unread post by **Britjoe** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 2:23 am

should of bought a beater if you had no experiance.