Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

katamari64.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 441 posts

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#181

Post by stymaar »

lvoudour wrote: post #127

I have never been a wikipedia contributor (let alone a mod), but their points seem fair. Maybe not fair for the particular case, but fair for the general case. People who ridicule wikipedia policies should at least acknowledge that the modern internet is a very low trust society with millions of bad actors trying to push their agenda at the expense of others. And now with AI bots running amok the headache increases t…

Also, how are we supposed to know that JangaFX is a real company, and its CEO a real person?

Creating fake companies and persona is not particularly high effort today, if that's all it takes for a pet project to be featured on Wikipedia, it's going to end up full of crap real quick.

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#182

Post by stymaar »

nvme0n1p1 wrote: post #17
recursivecaveat wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would consider it extremely obscure overall. A large majority of programmers would not be aware of its existence. At the same time there are clearly much less popular languages with articles so it is kindof weird to push to delete. (eg: random scheme implementation w/ no releases in 20 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SISC ) I would say that wikipedia broadly favors programming languages as far as notability. Li…

SISC is there because it's not notable, so the busybodies haven't even noticed the page exists. Odin, however, is notable, and that put it on their radar as a target for attacking its notability.

And here's the persecution LARPing the article talks about.

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#183

Post by pwdisswordfishq »

> Wikipedia seems stuck in an antiquated worldview where things like traditionally-published books with second- or third-hand reports of what happened, and which are frequently incomplete or wholly inaccurate, are nonetheless considered more authoritative than primary sources you can find with a ten-second Google search.

Because we should always take everything people say about themselves at face value. If you say you're notable, then you're notable. Obviously.

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#184

Post by _def »

econ wrote: post #91
andrybak wrote: post #10

> Articles for Deletion votes -- original with comments > > Summarizing it, 5/7 for delete have accounts, and 1/4 for keep have accounts. Not along after the final vote, a Wikipedia admin deleted the article. Being a little bit lax with my language, the majority's consensus agreed that Odin isn't notable, and the article had no reliable sources. important clarification about a popular misconception: "Articles for del…

[flagged]

Are you seriously complaining that you are not getting taken seriously anymore after creating a track record of acting in bad faith?

You literally can't create constructive online communities if you don't do that.

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#186

Post by stymaar »

woodruffw wrote: post #32
jibal wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Odin is extremely well known to every human being who keeps up on programming language development, along with Zig, Nim, D, Jai, V, Crystal, Carbon, and others. "programming topics" isn't relevant.

I keep up with PL development, and I am only vaguely aware of Odin (and same for Jai and V). (But this isn’t the point: lots of programmers know about relatively obscure thing, but that does not itself make them notable. Notability is a well-defined property on Wikipedia.)

This exactly!

There are probably thousands of JavaScript packages on NPM that are more well-known than Odin, that doesn't mean they deserve their own Wikipedia page.

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#187

Post by cygx »

PakistaniDenzel wrote: post #171

Funny how GearsDatapacks ( https://github.com/gearsdatapacks ) votes to delete the Odin page because it's "non-notable" yet is a core member of the non-notable Gleam language which shockingly has a Wikipedia page

Well, Casey Muratori argued github stars should be considered a metric of notability, and the Gleam repository has almost twice the number (21.6k vs Odin's 11k)!

Jokes aside, I'm not sure Gleam belongs on Wikipedia if Odin does not...

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#188

Post by pwdisswordfishq »

staplung wrote: post #44

I'm not sure I understand why even a truly obscure programming language article should ever be deleted; it's not like Wikipedia is running low on paper. If Odin ceased all development tomorrow it would be good to have some record of what it was. For the record, I like Odin. (On homebrew it appears to have been downloaded 6,707 in the past year. Compare to:) zig: 71,565 rust: 304,405 golang: 1,246,300 malbogle: 9

> it's not like Wikipedia is running low on paper

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arguments_to_avoid_i...

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#189

Post by killpedoslikeu »

halperter wrote: post #157
questiona wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Did you create an account _just_ so you could comment? lol. Anyways, footnotes seem to work or are in-text. Links work as well so IDK the problem? Then you talk about the claim of notability? Wikipedia's terms for notability are different than just a lot of people using the product. It's not the best, and should be reworked, but you're confusing wiki policies for general terms. Then, we summarize that the article, au…

[flagged]

Re: Odin, Wikipedia and engagement farming

#190

Post by 20k »

I'm glad someone's calling this out for what it is. These twitter influences are professional horseshit mongers that pretend to be acting in good faith, but flip what they're saying 180 degrees to fit whatever will drive maximum engagement in the moment. Its something that tends to slide by unless you stop and actually try to reconcile all the disparate things that someone has said, at which point you realise literally none of it makes any sense

Also, it seems like almost nobody here has actually read the entire article: the whole point of this is dissecting whether or not the author of odin truly believes what they are saying, which it seems like they don't

Post reply on HN