20 Feb
2025
20 Feb
'25
9:17 p.m.
I tried to delete an “s” from the word states in an incorrect quotation. Changed it twice.
It was changed back. Changed the whole meaning of the quote.
Sent from my iPhone
Robert Harrison
bobh(a)tds.net
On Feb 20, 2025, at 11:07 PM, Nigel Johnson Ham via
cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 2025-02-20 16:16, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote:
In these cases, did someone roll back your changes? Was discussion added to the Talk
tab?
I do enough Wikipedia edits that I get to vote on board membership. Or used to. I have
only done a few edits in recent years. The trickiest edit has been the page for a woman
who was a child actor in the 70s but is now a doctor. The info in her page was wrong (and
unattributed) and she hasn't done any interviews in 20 years or described in any media
coverage what she has done since leaving the entertainment business. I got her e-mail
address and exchanged messages with her. It was completely surreal. We discussed what she
wants the general public to know about her now. I asked if she was sure on a few points,
e.g., when I thought it might be too specific on where she is now. What is on the page
about her is what she felt comfortable with (as of 2019-2020). To get around the "no
original research" thing, I added a Talk tab section explaining all of the above and
offered to make the email exchanges available (with her contact info redacted). That was
5-6 years ago and no one has edited the page since.
If someone has something they think should be in a Wikipedia page and had it removed, I
can help get it added to a Talk tab entry at a minimum.
> On 2/17/25 8:26 AM, David Wise via cctalk wrote:
> In my case, the self-appointed gatekeeper rejected material from the AES Disk
Recording Anthology.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Ken Seefried via cctalk <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
> Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2025 12:55 PM
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
> Cc: Ken Seefried <seefriek(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: [cctalk] Re: Elliott Algol
>
> On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 1:53 PM Cameron Kaiser via cctalk <
> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>> I admit to a bit of pique here: I don't even bother updating Wikipedia
>> articles
>> anymore because they'll always get reverted by someone with less of a life
>> than
>> me for any number of specious reasons.
>>
>>
> This is an almost perfect description of my experience of Wikipedia.
My only experience in editing was frustrating and a complete waste of time: Somebody
posted that there is no legal definition of a pint in Canada, and the fact that their
moniker was "National Pist" may give you an idea of their bona fides. So I got
in touch with Measurements Canada, an agency of Innovation, Science and Economic
Development Canada (previously Industry Canada). An inspector replied that a pint is one
eighth of a gallon, and a gallon if defined by metric standards as 45609 ten-millionths of
a cubic metre. Doing the math, you can see that this works out to 568.26 cc. So I posted
this with reference to the specific regulation that the inspector had quoted to me.
One week later, it had been changed back to 'There is no legal definition of a pint
in Canada'. I tried to change it back to the correct legal definition above, but I
was locked out. Naturally the contributor was 'National Pist' again!
Then they asked me for money! I got a [polite rpely to my outraged comment, but still
could not log in!
In my last ten years as a college professor, anybody quoting wikipedia, despite having
been warned,got a healthy dose of red ink from my pen!
--
Nigel Johnson, MSc., MIEEE, MCSE VE3ID/G4AJQ/VA3MCU
Amateur Radio, the origin of the open-source concept!
Skype: TILBURY2591