Search posterous

Search all posts and users. Type a name, type a favorite song title, whatever! See what comes up.
  

More posterous blogs











More recommended blogs »

Here are posterous posts filed under wikipedia...

chris97 says...

Als ich vor rund sechs Jahren meine ersten Erfahrungen mit der Wikipedia machte, hab ich das Konzept so verstanden, dass dort kollaborativ ein universelles, freies, digitales Nachschlagewerk entstehen soll, indem jeder ein bisschen beisteuert. Ich hab meinen Soll dort erfüllt und über die Jahre immer mal wieder minimale Verbesserungen eingebracht und Unsinnsänderungen entfernt, und mich nicht weiter interessiert dafür, was sonst noch so hinter den Kulissen passiert.

Weiterlesen bei lists.wikimedia.org

Ein Beispiel, welches symptomatisch die Situation in der Wikipedia darstellt...

Filed under: Wikipedia

sarikas.at says...

Google Wave ist nicht nur eine Mischung aus Wiki und Chat, man kann auch Wikipedia Einträge ganz einfach per Gatget in einen Wave einbinden. Alles was man machen muss, ist die folgende Adresse als Kontakt zu adden und dem Wave hinzuzufügen: wikifier@appspot.com

Falls ihr mich auf Google Wave adden wollt, dann gebt multitude08 ein

Filed under: wikipedia

Bryce says...

Filed under: Wikipedia

Will says...

My friend DJ Smith over at WebDrivenGuy just posted the story about how Wikipedia is losing thousands of page creators each month. 

Even though I love Wikipedia, I also love reading stories like this. 

This is a great illustration of one of the most disruptive aspects of Web 2.0: when you build a modern web platform, your challenge is not to build an online destination that attracts 347 million page views each month (which is Wikipedia’s current monthly traffic).  Your challenge instead is to build a platform that attracts a small segment of people, but that engages these folks in an intense way, and gives them something productive to do that can be shared with others. 

If you succeed in doing this, you’ll join the ranks of YouTube, Blogger, Flickr, Wikipedia, eBay, Facebook, MySpace, craigslist, Squidoo, wordpress, Digg, TypePad, Topix, Photobucket, Scribd...and, although my company is a hybrid model, I'd include AlumniFidelity in there, along with plenty of others.

Quick side-note: don't be fooled by corporations that create instant hits like Hulu, which are backed by content that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to create and market.  That sort of site isn't a modern web platform.  Everything about these sites are supported by dollars that were generated elsewhere, and they just happen to be on the web. 

Filed under: wikipedia

HikiCulture says...

Whenever people mention Wikipedia, I always tend to hear someone mocking it in some way ---- why?

The only place I find Wikipedia to not be such a great resource is when it comes to medical-related topics. It's often that I notice huge inaccuracies and a lack of sufficient data when it comes to (seemingly) most medical-related topics; one good example is the Wikipedia article on Asperger's - it simply doesn't delve deep enough into what Asperger's really is. The Wikipedia article on Asperger's is definitely not the first web-page I want people to check out when I want to give people insight into what Asperger's really is like. I won't elaborate on what the article lacks, but one thing is that it doesn't even mention 'stimming' anywhere on the page, which is a huge flaw in my opinion.

Filed under: Wikipedia

cherrykat says...

2,559 of Wikipedia’s best articles are ‘featured articles’.

Rob Matthews decided to press ‘cntrl + p’  and printed these out.
The result is this weighty tome of some 5000 pages.
This piece was to convey that it is only through computers that this amount of information becomes palatable, searchable and essentially useful.

The sheer volume of information stored on Wikipedia is massive. A text based archive of the English version takes up 2.5GB and if you include images, that number jumps to over 78GB.
If you were to print out the whole thing (not just the featured articles), this is what it would look like based on volumes 25cm high and 5cm thick (some 400 leaves), each page having two columns, each columns having 80 rows, and each row having 50 characters.

     

Filed under: wikipedia

HikiCulture says...

Someone posted a link to an interesting Wikipedia article in the HC IRC channel a few moments ago. The article is about a hermit from Pennsylvania who went by the name William (Amos) Wilson who had lived in a cave for nineteen years.

Here's a link to the Wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_%28Amos%29_Wilson

PennsylvaniaHermit.jpg

As you would have read, it is not entirely certain whether this story is partially made up or not, but it is still interesting nonetheless.

Filed under: Wikipedia

Slipperaci says...

Wikipedia doesn't lie at all!
And by the way, he's one of my favorite rappers.

Filed under: Wikipedia

HikiCulture says...

Since a lot of my blog-readers happen to have Aspergers (or at least have family members who are on the spectrum), I decided to seek out good Asperger's-related links to provide people with rather than simply posting a link to the Wikipedia Asperger's page (for example). It's far too often that I lazily point people over to the Asperger's Wikipedia article when I really should be providing people with much better resources. People need better insight into what Asperger's really is. Sure, the Asperger's Wikipedia page is an alright resource, but it does not begin to cover many of the issues that I feel NT (neuro-typical) people should know about.

I had remembered that the PsychForums Asperger's board had a thread which listed various Asperger's-related links. I finally decided to take a look at the links to see what kind of pages they linked to. There are some great links in the thread, so I 'hand-picked' three of the few links in that thread for you people. I was glad that I looked through the list of links, because I've never come across any of these web-pages before; I've happened to perform many Google searches for the term 'Asperger's' and its many relevant terms without stumbling across any of these pages.

Here are the links I found most interesting:

. Asperger Syndrome Fact Sheet - http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/asperger/detail_asperger.htm

. A Syndrome For Success - http://www.smh.com.au/news/Health/A-syndrome-for-success/2005/06/09/1118123948555.html

. The Eight Asperger Advantages - http://www.coachingasperger.com/advantages.htm



My thanks goes out to all the people who submitted these links to the PsychForums Asperger's board.

Filed under: Wikipedia

zooey says...

Per Gahrton har upptäckt samma sak som... många andra (inte jag personligen -- har aldrig varit involverad i wikipedia) och skriver i en Brännpunktartikel på SvD:

'Visst kan man försöka korrigera felaktigheter. Men om man gör det är risken stor att felet sätts tillbaka inom några minuter av någon av de lobbyister som tycks ha möjlighet att ägna sig åt Wikipedia på heltid.'

Och han frågar

'Kan man alltså använda Mona Sahlin som sanningsvittne för en biografi över Fredrik Reinfeldt och fortfarande tas på allvar?'

Tja, det är precis så det är på wikipedia. Så fort ett ämne har fanatiska anhängare, är det precis så det blir. Att ange källa -- om det ens sker (svenska wiki saknar ofta t o m källangivelser) -- anses tillräckligt. Att källan är helt partisk, eller rent utav i somliga fall kan begripas som pr-material kvalitetsmässigt, tycks ovidkommande.

'I själva verket är vissa Wikipediabiografier ett slagfält där de uthålligaste vinner i längden.'

Det är liksom inte någon mening att bry sig så mycket om wikipedia, annat än möjligen vad gäller fullkomligt okontroversiella ämnen.

Filed under: wikipedia