>>> The facts show that "good enough" tends to be an issue, a sign that a
>>> approval process for entries is still needed.
>> Or more editors... all of the faults you found can be corrected by
>> clicking the "edit this page" link at the top of the relevant page. You
>> don't even need to create an account.
> While I feel this thread may be shut down soon, I feel it's important in
> general to many of the folks on this list. Not all of us have the years
> of experience that folks like dhan has. Many of us are somewhat new to
> Unix and need all the help we can get. Accurate help. What this thread
> has taught me is that Wikipedia is NOT a good source for facts. It can
> be a source to use in starting a search but not as a final answer. There
> apparently isn't and never will be a final answer.
For some stuff, like Super Smash Brothers Melee info, the Wikipedia and
Wikibooks are fantastic. This doesn't hold true for even just
entertainment info, I've corrected things on the Arrested Development and
Scrubs TV show pages before.
When it comes to Mac OS X Server though, I'm not going to put a large
amount of time into correcting things there. I simply assume that the
Wikipedia, like most places on the web, is a collection of vague
definitions and near facts when dealing with anything technical about
Apple's OS. The only part I have even looked at is the launchd page, and
that's only because they created that page out of my launchd article on
With people in our business I don't even know how the wikipedia would
begin to rank as a definitive source for Apple OS info. Maybe for the
Apple IIe and the design criteria for LOGO, but not for Mac OS X Server.
My time will continue to be spent at AFP548.com. We have a loose editorial
process in place and do fact/sanity checking on anything before we post
> This is bad. It tends
> to run urban legends into a formalized sport.
I love snopes.com!
>I wonder how many middle
> and high school teachers are allowing it as sources to papers. :(
You hear that screaming? It's my degree in European History. I was one of
the first people to use online sourcing at school and it was a daunting
task that was only allowed as a sort of experiment. Turabian's at the time
had very little to say on how to site online resources, although I'm sure
it's been updated now. In many ways I would rather trust Gopher to the WWW
for info. That info was almost guaranteed to be sourced from a university,
although it still gave no assurances.
Regular encyclopedias are bad enough as a secondary source. Anyone
teaching HS level history, and allowing Wikipedia as a source, should be
punched in the face. (In fact most history courses under a 200 level at a
university miss the point of studying history all together. It's not about
dates, it's about what and why. Even more fun are the primary sources,
there is nothing like reading microfiche of handwritten letters made in a
cave all day long. Really, I'm serious.)