|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13801
|
|
|
Or is it just me? I started to research something and found the articles in wikipedia were either non existent or were just stubs.
I just lost a good few hours editing and creating and referencing stuff. And it was stuff I never normally find interesting. How weird is that?
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yup, I've noticed that. Terrible waste of time. I suppose that it gives one a feeling of "giving back" to the community -- and the satisfaction of knowing that there are at least some things that one knows more about than other people. 
Most of the time, I just correct spelling and grammar, and small things that are blatantly wrong. I don't mind problems of that nature (much) in emails and messageboard posts, but there really shouldn't be any in an encyclopaedia. It doesn't do Wikipedia's credibility any good at all.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jedediah
|
 |
Likes it here |
Location: Made in NZ
Registered: March 2006
Messages: 170
|
|
|
Lol. That doesn't suprise me one little bit, Deeej. You ARE an encyclopedia, and a good one too. Cheers.
E Te Atua tukuna mai ki au te Mauri tauki te tango i nga mea
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If any of my knowledge seems encylopaedic, it is probably because I just got it straight out of an encylopaedia.
The wonderful thing about messageboards like these is that they are not quite real time, so there is usually a chance to look something up before posting. I'm sure if you met me in real life my natural ignorance would shine through.
Deeeeeej
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
