Re: Weller badmouthed Wiki for years, now Weller is addicted to Wiki

On Sat, 8 Nov 2008 09:22:14 -0800 (PST), in sci.archaeology, GDenke wrote:

On Nov 3, 6:05 pm, Daryl Krupa <icycal...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 3, 12:36 pm, Garry Denke <GarryDe...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Weller badmouthed Wiki for years, now Weller is addicted to Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&dir=prev&limit=500&target=Dougweller

Internet addict Weller, a hilarious Character

Way too Funny

"now" addicted to Wiki?
The earliest entry on the list is from 2 1/2 years ago,

Addiction began February 3, 2008

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&dir=prev&limit=500&target=Dougweller

Heel Stone tetramorph (Hele Stone tetramorph) Stonehenge, the Ancient
of Days throne (Ark of the Covenant) thereunder, Son of man (Ezekiel)
and Druids stored Throne for end time. 63rd Signal Battalion "C"
Company 0.063 (SAS) Signal Squadron (Quintessence)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetramorph

Heel Stone tetramorph (Hele Stone tetramorph) Stonehenge, the Ancient
of Days throne (Ark of the Covenant) thereunder, Turcaud-Conrad
universal magnetic reversal Excavation day. 63rd Signal Battalion "C"
Company 0.063 (SAS) Signal Squadron (Reserve)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/144000

Go figure?

In the last couple of years Wikipedia has tightened its policies.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:RS
Articles need 'reliable sources' now, eg:
"Material that has been vetted by the scholarly community is regarded as
reliable; this means published in reputable peer-reviewed sources and/or
by well-regarded academic presses."

"Organizations and individuals that express views that are widely
acknowledged by reliable sources as fringe, pseudoscience or extremist
should be used only as sources about themselves and in articles about
themselves or their activities.[1] Any information used must be directly
relevant to the subject. Articles should not be based primarily on such
sources. An individual extremist or fringe source may be entirely excluded
if there is no independent evidence that it is prominent enough for
mention. The material taken from such sources should not be contentious
and must not involve claims made about third parties. Fringe and extremist
sources must not be used to obscure or describe the mainstream view, nor
used to indicate a fringe theory's level of acceptance."

"Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a
reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.[4] Reliable sources are
necessary both to substantiate material within articles and to give credit
to authors and publishers in order to avoid plagiarism and copyright
violations. Sources should directly support the information as it is
presented in an article and should be appropriate to the claims made:
exceptional claims require high-quality sources.
In general, the most reliable sources are peer-reviewed journals and books
published in university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines,
journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and
mainstream newspapers. As a rule of thumb, the greater the degree of
scrutiny involved in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and
scrutinizing the evidence and arguments of a particular work, the more
reliable it is.
Academic and peer-reviewed publications are highly valued and usually the
most reliable sources in areas where they are available, such as history,
medicine and science. Material from reliable non-academic sources may also
be used in these areas, particularly if they are respected mainstream
publications. The appropriateness of any source always depends on the
context. Where there is disagreement between sources, their views should
be clearly attributed in the text.
For a guideline discussing the reliability of particular types of sources,
see Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS). Because policies take precedence
over guidelines, in the case of an inconsistency between this page and
that one, this page has priority, and WP:RS should be updated accordingly.
To discuss the reliability of specific sources, consult the
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard.
All articles must adhere to Wikipedia's neutrality policy, fairly
representing all majority and significant-minority viewpoints that have
been published by reliable sources, in rough proportion to the prominence
of each view. Tiny-minority views and fringe theories need not be
included, except in articles devoted to them."

It's by no means perfect but it is extremely popular, and a lot more
rewarding than posting here. And it has the bonus of not being a very good
environment for people like Denke.

Doug
--
Doug Weller --
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Amun - co-owner/co-moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Amun/

.