| Revision as of 01:13, 18 June 2006 editKim Bruning (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers20,995 edits Indeed← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:25, 18 June 2006 edit undoAdam Carr (talk | contribs)26,681 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
| : I don't want to start any trouble, please don't look at this as troublemaking, but the article says 'Mrs Irwin, the member for Fowler, said she believed Dr Carr was "getting dirt on people".' and '"People who are ALP staffers should not be doing that type of thing," she said.' - and this was from a Labor MP. And Ms George was infact labelled a communist as the news article states - http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Jennie_George&oldid=4449037 ] 00:44, 18 June 2006 (UTC) | : I don't want to start any trouble, please don't look at this as troublemaking, but the article says 'Mrs Irwin, the member for Fowler, said she believed Dr Carr was "getting dirt on people".' and '"People who are ALP staffers should not be doing that type of thing," she said.' - and this was from a Labor MP. And Ms George was infact labelled a communist as the news article states - http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Jennie_George&oldid=4449037 ] 00:44, 18 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :: Indeed she did. That's what we were looking at. ] 01:13, 18 June 2006 (UTC) | :: Indeed she did. That's what we were looking at. ] 01:13, 18 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
| '''This article is just an anti-Labor dirtjob by a 3rd rate tabloid hack. I'm not concerned about and nor should anyone else be. I have of course not compiled "dirt files" on anyone. ''' ] 01:25, 18 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:25, 18 June 2006
At last, someone gets the real problem with Misplaced Pages
"No complex project can be expected to yield satisfactory results without a clear vision of what the goal is – and here I mean what a worthy internet encyclopedia actually looks like – and a plan to reach that goal, which will include a careful inventory of the needed skills and knowledge and some meaningful measures of progress. That vision of the goal must do something that Misplaced Pages and Wikipedians steadfastly decline to do today, and that is to consider seriously the user, the reader. What is the user meant to take away from the experience of consulting a Misplaced Pages article? The most candid defenders of the encyclopedia today confess that it cannot be trusted to impart correct information but can serve as a starting-point for research. By this they seem to mean that it supplies some links and some useful search terms to plug into Google. This is not much. It is a great shame that some excellent work – and there is some – is rendered suspect both by the ideologically required openness of the process and by association with much distinctly not excellent work that is accorded equal standing by that same ideology. One simple fact that must be accepted as the basis for any intellectual work is that truth – whatever definition of that word you may subscribe to – is not democratically determined. And another is that talent, whether for soccer or for exposition, is not equally distributed across the population, while a robust confidence is one's own views apparently is. If there is a systemic bias in Misplaced Pages, it is to have ignored so far these inescapable facts." Robert McHenry
- I am not an Administrator and don't wish to be one.
- I do not respond to anonymous comments.
- I do not edit articles on currently serving Australian politicians.
- All photos taken by me are tagged accordingly. Other photos uploaded by me in the past may be deleted.
Yes, there is an article about me in the Herald-Sun
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,19501894-2,00.html Timeshift 23:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Likely it is. We're looking into it. (btw, why is this page semi-protected?) Kim Bruning 23:59, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Adam, do you have time to come on irc tomorrow? irc.freenode.net, #wikipedia, ask for me there :) Kim Bruning 00:02, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- At this stage of looking through the evidence, it seems that some anons have been messing up the articles a bit after Adam wrote them. They were originally more neutral to start with. Kim Bruning 00:18, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- I don't want to start any trouble, please don't look at this as troublemaking, but the article says 'Mrs Irwin, the member for Fowler, said she believed Dr Carr was "getting dirt on people".' and '"People who are ALP staffers should not be doing that type of thing," she said.' - and this was from a Labor MP. And Ms George was infact labelled a communist as the news article states - http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Jennie_George&oldid=4449037 Timeshift 00:44, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed she did. That's what we were looking at. Kim Bruning 01:13, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
This article is just an anti-Labor dirtjob by a 3rd rate tabloid hack. I'm not concerned about and nor should anyone else be. I have of course not compiled "dirt files" on anyone. Adam 01:25, 18 June 2006 (UTC)