|
Post by Stone Heart on Oct 25, 2007 19:30:48 GMT -5
So, I'm on Wikipedia, doing a report on New York 'cause it's due tomorrow, right? So I leave my computer, close out all the windows, et cetera, 'cause I wanted to take a rest for a second. So, I come back, get back on, blah, blah, blah, and I go back to the New York page. I'll provide a link, just 'cause I was already there. Be warned, though. If you've never seen such a slaughter of the English language, then don't click this. Pretty screwy. Click at your own risk.Anyone else see what I see?
|
|
|
Post by Tundra on Oct 26, 2007 4:38:39 GMT -5
Well um, i didn't know New Yorks animal was a beaver? And um Excelsior sounds kinda familiar. I don't know if it's just me but some of that sounds kinda well, odd/weird.
Please specify what exactly we should be looking at?
|
|
|
Post by Stone Heart on Oct 26, 2007 15:41:48 GMT -5
Looks like somebody went in there and fixed it overnight. Along the top there was quite a bit of profanity, and some of the images were changed... Guess this whole topic just became pointless overnight...
|
|
|
Post by Tundra on Oct 26, 2007 15:45:08 GMT -5
Well.... This is kinda awkward then. Does this stuff go to the trash can or?
|
|
|
Post by Spooky on Oct 27, 2007 4:42:41 GMT -5
As much as I love Wikipedia, and although it's usually 99.9 percentgenuine information, that still stays the only problem. It's a shame that people abuse the powers of free-editing, to taint what other people might actually want (or need in your case) to know.
Apparently, the creator of Wikipedia is making a new site, that somehow restricts contribution, so that this sort of stuff will really be a minority. Personally, I think it's a great site for gathering quick information, but if I were to ever be doing a project, I'd probably go to a second site, just to doublecheck that the information is completely true. (Plus, it looks better in your bibliography if you post more stuff)
Eh? Am I still typing? I need to get out more...
|
|