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

A prominent composer lost his Wikipedia page

tedgioia.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–185 of 185 posts

Re: A prominent composer lost his Wikipedia page

#181

Post by egberts1 »

notafraudster wrote: post #169
egberts1 wrote: post #160

I was making a Wikipedia page back in 2004 about Deaf Cultures and Deaf Educators. Both were summarily deleted. So I started it again but under my User directory. That too got deleted. So, Wikipedia editors are inherently anti-diversity.

This sounds like a bad experience. I find Wikipedia pretty daunting and I'm not surprised you got tripped up trying to edit. But as a lay person reading your post, I do not know what "Deaf Cultures and Deaf Educators" is. Is this a book? I tried googling for it but didn't find it. Wikipedia does have an article on Deaf culture (lowercase c): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaf_culture -- it was created in March of 200…

Yeah, I was even more surprised that history log didn’t exist, much less its content.

Re: A prominent composer lost his Wikipedia page

#182

Post by barnabee »

bazoom42 wrote: post #175
barnabee wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternatively, critique threads like this and overall community discussions might eventually lead to a change of policy. They also might not, but it's both a lot less work than your suggestion, and if succesful would lead to a better overall outcome.

So the problem is it is easier to edit wikipedia than creating ones own page or wiki? In that case, this should be adressed by better tools instead of convincing wikipedia to accept anything.

Perhaps! I also believe Wikipedia would be a better encyclopaedia and a more useful resource if it relaxed the notability requirements.

But it’s true that in the absence of that, the alternative is indeed to create a page on a different wiki/web publishing platform or one’s own website, or even to create another wiki, yes, and improving the tooling for that would also be great, of course.

Maybe it’d even be better if we used Wikipedia for less and brought the whole web closer to its original vision.

Re: A prominent composer lost his Wikipedia page

#183

Post by picture »

dmitrygr wrote: post #143

Wikipedia is a joke nowadays. I made a small correction on the ARM Cortex-M page (the listed instructions available in ARMv8-M base were wrong), I cited the relevant ARM document in the change. Nope, got reverted back to the wrong thing... Pretty sure I know this architecture approximately 1000% better than the joker who reverted this, but OK, whatever, let everyone have the wrong info. I gave up.

I just happened to notice your edit on the Cortex-M page when correcting a typo. As far as I can tell, it doesn't look like your edit was reverted. All of your changes are still present on the current version.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ARM_Cortex-M&type...

Re: A prominent composer lost his Wikipedia page

#184

Post by dmitrygr »

picture wrote: post #183
dmitrygr wrote: post #143

Wikipedia is a joke nowadays. I made a small correction on the ARM Cortex-M page (the listed instructions available in ARMv8-M base were wrong), I cited the relevant ARM document in the change. Nope, got reverted back to the wrong thing... Pretty sure I know this architecture approximately 1000% better than the joker who reverted this, but OK, whatever, let everyone have the wrong info. I gave up.

I just happened to notice your edit on the Cortex-M page when correcting a typo. As far as I can tell, it doesn't look like your edit was reverted. All of your changes are still present on the current version. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ARM_Cortex-M&type...

That was a second attempt a few years later when I decided to try again. First time was while not logged in.

Re: A prominent composer lost his Wikipedia page

#185

Post by mbrubeck »

kevinpet wrote: post #164
hyperpape wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't the case. I'm familiar with the standards applied for living philosophers, and they fall far short of the level of "future Nobel prize winner" (A quick glance at Wikipedia show I took classes from 7 such individuals while in grad school). Similarly for physicists: there are over 1000 21st century physicists listed on Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:21st-century_physicis... .

You misrepresent my claim. I said it is natural to assume that someone who has done work that will earn a Nobel prize is at least approaching notability. I did not say that is required for notability. I'm not a wikipedia expert but many of those don't meet their criteria for notability. Taking the first in the Canadian physicists category, I get https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Abella The only non-primary source t…

> The edit history on wikipedia shows an article was created and then deleted in 2014, not "just a few months before Donna Strickland won the Nobel".

Gioia is referring to this page, which was created in March 2018 and rejected in May 2018, which is indeed "just a few months before Donna Strickland won the Nobel":

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=842614385

(However, the stated rejection reason was that the draft article did not provide the required level of independent reliable sources.)

Post reply on HN