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

Alan MacMasters: How the great toaster hoax was exposed

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 74 posts

Re: Alan MacMasters: How the great toaster hoax was exposed

#61

Post by kmacdough »

yummypaint wrote: post #28

Given the broad (though admittedly shallow) impact this had in Scotland, and how long it was perpetuated, perhaps the hoax itself deserves an article? The people who learned false stuff about him aren't going to unlearn it because the article was deleted. There needs to be something to set the record straight.

It is! Although not with it's own article. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia#Not...

Probably for the best given the sheer volume of examples & since the meta-lesson is more relevant.

Re: Alan MacMasters: How the great toaster hoax was exposed

#64

Post by bazoom42 »

ispo wrote: post #60
derefr wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wikipedia is not a primary encyclopedia, its a secondary source. Technically, Wikipedia is a tertiary source. A "third hand source", as you say. A secondary source is something like e.g. a book written by a historian based on research they did translating and putting together some primary-source ancient writings. The secondary source can be considered semi-authoritative on a topic; but is still interpreted through…

This tertiary source concept you just invented it, it does not exist.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertiary_source

Re: Alan MacMasters: How the great toaster hoax was exposed

#65

Post by setr »

mellosouls wrote: post #8

One of the weaker points of Wikipedia is the way editors lazily refer to journalistic "reliable" sources as authoritative when a significant amount of the time the journalist is lazily using WP as their own source. Just a couple of these circular references build up a circumstantial base of "evidence" which is then itself used to bolster the original weak claims which often reflect nothing more than an editorial or j…

I think ultimately the problem is that Wikipedia assumes journalists should be treated by default with a degree of respect above “professional gossip monkeys”.

Re: Alan MacMasters: How the great toaster hoax was exposed

#66

Post by [deleted] »

mellosouls wrote: post #8

One of the weaker points of Wikipedia is the way editors lazily refer to journalistic "reliable" sources as authoritative when a significant amount of the time the journalist is lazily using WP as their own source. Just a couple of these circular references build up a circumstantial base of "evidence" which is then itself used to bolster the original weak claims which often reflect nothing more than an editorial or j…

[deleted]

Re: Alan MacMasters: How the great toaster hoax was exposed

#67

Post by mellosouls »

teddyh wrote: post #17
mellosouls wrote: post #8

One of the weaker points of Wikipedia is the way editors lazily refer to journalistic "reliable" sources as authoritative when a significant amount of the time the journalist is lazily using WP as their own source. Just a couple of these circular references build up a circumstantial base of "evidence" which is then itself used to bolster the original weak claims which often reflect nothing more than an editorial or j…

There is no realistic better alternative which does not install a de facto Ministry of Truth.

Possibly true, but its important that users are fully aware that the "Ministry of Truth" operates at times on Wikipedia; not everybody is.

Re: Alan MacMasters: How the great toaster hoax was exposed

#68

Post by teddyh »

mellosouls wrote: post #67
teddyh wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no realistic better alternative which does not install a de facto Ministry of Truth.

Possibly true, but its important that users are fully aware that the "Ministry of Truth" operates at times on Wikipedia; not everybody is.

> the "Ministry of Truth" operates at times on Wikipedia

Please elaborate. Or, even better, link to examples.

Re: Alan MacMasters: How the great toaster hoax was exposed

#70

Post by Haga »

mellosouls wrote: post #8

One of the weaker points of Wikipedia is the way editors lazily refer to journalistic "reliable" sources as authoritative when a significant amount of the time the journalist is lazily using WP as their own source. Just a couple of these circular references build up a circumstantial base of "evidence" which is then itself used to bolster the original weak claims which often reflect nothing more than an editorial or j…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN