Wikipedia Turns 15 • Hacker News Board

Re: Wikipedia Turns 15

#111

Post by davidy123 » Sat, Jan 16, 2016, 3:06 PM UTC

rodionos wrote: post #18

Congratulations, Wikipedia! I found it tremendously useful over the years. I have one suggestion for them. I wouldn't mind making micro-donations for articles of particular quality and relevance to me. Say I find something useful and click on a '2c' donation button. The system doesn't trigger an immediate payment transaction because I would not have time to do it but instead waits until I accumulate $1+ in 'spend' an…

This idea was proposed for mainstream news, and rejected. It would amplify the filter bubble effect. Certain topics which are probably already popular would get all kinds of funding, others , which might be just as important but just not currently popular, would be ignored. It's better to consider the content generally.

Re: Wikipedia Turns 15

#112

Post by contingencies » Sun, Jan 17, 2016, 11:15 AM UTC

gmt2027 wrote: post #31

deepnet wrote: post #24

I pay monthly to wikipedia, I use it tens of times a day, it is a fantastic unparalleled resource - a real public good. Wikipedia is a proof of a utopian vision that infused the early web - ensuring public rights wins public contribution. Humanities collective knowledge is better distributed because of Wikipedia, a true wonder of the modern world. IMHO, we must treasure wikipedia as it is not clear it could happen ag…

Wikipedia confirms that "embiggens" is a made up word from the Simpsons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_the_Iconoclast#Embiggen_a...

Dictionaries are embiggened by new words.

Re: Wikipedia Turns 15

#113

Post by jcrben » Mon, Jan 18, 2016, 2:59 AM UTC

10909489 wrote: post #67

cooper12 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you see something problematic, why don't you click the edit button and address it? Or if you don't have the necessary know-how, why don't you click the talk tab and bring up the issue there? Wikipedia belongs to all of us, if you have the mindset that it's someone else's problem to fix, then you're missing Wikipedia's point. There's nothing wrong with being just a consumer, but this is just like someone complainin…

> If you see something problematic, why don't you click the edit button and address it? Or if you don't have the necessary know-how, why don't you click the talk tab and bring up the issue there? In my case, I can't. I began editing Wikipedia in 2004, and I got banned last year after leaving a message on the talk page of another user telling them not to use aggressive language when interacting with new users. The way…

That's pretty odd and concerning. If you email me at ben@bencreasy.com I will look into it, because I've never seen an editor get blocked for something like that - unless you don't know the right people or process to ask for an appeal. Even then, Wikipedia is relatively forgiving and we're usually willing to take people back if they want to give it another shot. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Standard_offer

Re: Wikipedia Turns 15

#114

Post by niutech » Mon, Jan 18, 2016, 8:23 PM UTC

theklub wrote: post #39

deepnet wrote: post #24

I pay monthly to wikipedia, I use it tens of times a day, it is a fantastic unparalleled resource - a real public good. Wikipedia is a proof of a utopian vision that infused the early web - ensuring public rights wins public contribution. Humanities collective knowledge is better distributed because of Wikipedia, a true wonder of the modern world. IMHO, we must treasure wikipedia as it is not clear it could happen ag…

I feel like wikipedia killed the web in a way. Anytime you search for something 95% of the time wikipedia is the first result and thus 99% of the time it is I go to it for information. What websites or innovations have we missed out on because of this?

Definitely Encyclopædia Britannica (http://www.britannica.com) and Microsoft Encarta used to be much more popular.

Re: Wikipedia Turns 15

#115

Post by soared » Tue, Jan 19, 2016, 2:14 AM UTC

xorcist wrote: post #91

judemelancon wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet's supply of masters is much larger and more accessible. Is there a reason to think the video or other sources he found are from someone inferior in expertise to a local? Does that reason apply even for people who live outside major urban centers? Also, that line of thinking is letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. Remember the most likely outcome before was recognizing the cost of acquiring the k…

The Internet's supply of poseurs is far greater still. I think Stack Overflow is the canonical example. It feels like I deal daily with people who paste something from Stack Overflow instead of reading up on a library or API. It is made worse by all those to game their score system by being very quick to paste in a semi-related "answer".

At least on the internet you can tell who's lying and who isn't. SO lets you vote. If a bartender blatantly lies to you, you don't find out until days and there is no accountability.