PDA

View Full Version : Il2 makes Wikipedia...



falling-bird
10-07-2006, 10:37 AM
As spotted by Solnyshko33 at SimHQ€¦

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IL-2_Sturmovik_%28game%29

Whoooo€¦ Academia
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

F6_Ace
10-07-2006, 11:30 AM
I do like this at the top of the Wikipedia entry for 'World War Two'


Because of recent vandalism, editing of this article by anonymous or newly registered users is currently disabled. Such users may discuss changes, request unprotection, or create an account.

Maybe some 'revisionism' had been occurring...not unlike this forum http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

NonWonderDog
10-07-2006, 01:34 PM
I hardly think Wikipedia can be called anything like "academia." The whole thing is based on the ridiculous idea that the truth can be approached asymptotically. It's based on the absurd hypothesis that the right answers outnumber the wrong ones in all cases among the majority of people.

Anyone can add or edit an article, whether or not they have any knowledge at all. The problem with that, of course, is that there are more people without knowledge or with flawed knowledge than there are experts in a field. The PhD that's spent years of his life studying a field can be overruled on a topic if there are two high school dropouts that disagree with him.

It's nice to have an online repository of random facts, and in that regard I really do like Wikipedia. It's great for, say, finding out what TV shows Alan Partridge has been on. It is not, however, an academic source, nor is really a useful source of anything important.

If you turn to Wikipedia for physics or history, the information you read will almost certainly be wrong or incomplete -- and it probably won't have a list of further references either. It can also change wildly without notice, which means of course that citing Wikipedia is pointless. It's less pointless if you give the exact date and time referenced, but employees of the foundation have the right to delete any histories at will... and they do delete histories on occasion.

DuxCorvan
10-07-2006, 01:44 PM
Wikipedia, like Google, and in fact the whole net, is a tool a populo stulto.

Useful, anyway, but you have to be able to discern reliable data from an ocean of opinionated porridge, and that ain't easy.

CAF96th_Sillyak
10-07-2006, 01:49 PM
The Il-2 page has been on wikipedia for awhile. while using wikipedia one must be careful, alot of it is bullcrap since anyone can edit it. Be careful what you read on there.

SithSpeeder
10-07-2006, 05:23 PM
Wiki is about as good as a standard encyclopedia, maybe better.


"Nature magazine recently conducted a head-to-head competition between Wikipedia and Britannica, having experts compare 42 science-related articles. The result was that Wikipedia had about 4 errors per article, while Britannica had about 3. However, a pair of endevouring Wikipedians dug a little deeper and discovered that the Wikipedia articles in the sample were, on average, 2.6 times longer than Britannica's - meaning Wikipedia has an error rate far less than Britannica's."

* _54th_Speeder *

Akronnick
10-07-2006, 05:36 PM
Old news