[chris v]

Here's the bizarre paragraph:

Following September 11, 2001, Apple Computer began firing and facilitating the racially motivated deportation of dozens of segregated ethnic minorities, including individuals who had developed Mac OS X. Shortly thereafter, several Mac OS X-related projects were handed over to unqualified employees with no relevant Computer Science, or otherwise technical qualifications. Mac OS X has since changed very little, while tens of thousands of new bugs have been reported on it. OS X remains a historical remnant of Apple Computer's purchase of NeXT, being replaced by iPod as Apple's new hope for survival."

Aside from the bizarre syntax, bad grammar and weird political commentary did someone obviously have an axe to grind, here or what? OS X-- Historical remnant?

How did that get in there?

Full article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_C...Pre-foundation

[BasketofPuppies]

What part of anyone can update Wikipedia don't you understand?

[turtle777]

The joys of open source...

-t

[paully dub]

That's wiki for ya. Open editing. Someone don't like teh Apple.

edit: btw, anyone ever do something like that? I've been tempted a few times but thought "Nah! That's silly".

[turtle777]

Originally posted by BasketofPuppies:
What part of anyone can update Wikipedia don't you understand?

Well, that's not true.
HE doesn't know, so it's anyone except HIM !
Still leaves about 5 billion people.

-t

[TheMosco]

Did someone fix it?

[turtle777]

Originally posted by TheMosco:
Did someone fix it?

Only a matter of minutes...

-t

[chris v]

Originally posted by BasketofPuppies:
What part of anyone can update Wikipedia don't you understand?

Woops, I had a life, instead of knowing all about the internet. I just followed a link to the article, and had honestly never looked at that site before. But thanks to the friendly folks at teh luonge, I'm now up-to-the-minute �bercool like you!

I guess that makes wickypedia utterly useless, then, doesn't it?

[lavar78]

Originally posted by chris v:
I guess that makes wickypedia utterly useless, then, doesn't it?

No, it's extremely useful. It just means you have to be cautious when using any of that information.

[Mastrap]

Originally posted by chris v:


I guess that makes wickypedia utterly useless, then, doesn't it?

Nah, generally speaking wikipedia rocks. A great collection of knowedge. It's relatively rare that some idiot feels that he needs to take a dump in any particular article.

The best thing about wikipedia is that anybody can contribute. So if you wanted to write about, say, spelunking, you'd be adding to that knowledge base. Others would then edit your writing adding their own knowledge. A bit like the great libraries of the past, but open to everyone.

[Colin Davis]

I noticed that earlier. I posted a section to the "Talk" page, demanding to see something to back it up with a source. Since nothing's surfaced, it's fair to delete it.

Wikipedia is useful as a reference because people watch over it. People who would deface pages don't last long, I just wanted to give them a chance to explain themselves before deleting it. In retrospect..I should have removed it first, and then demanded an explanation before allowing it back

Colin "Wikipedia can be fun" Davis

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Mastrap:
The best thing about wikipedia is that anybody can contribute.

That is also the worst thing about it as well.

[Xeo]

Its definitely helpful to find info on subjects that don't otherwise have good websites out there about them. You just wouldn't want to quote it as a source in a research paper. Rather, you hope the article your reading lists sources and then you go find those. But for answering questions to general curiosity, it certainly has a lot there.

[paully dub]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
That is also the worst thing about it as well.

Kinda like this forum.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by paully dub:
Kinda like this forum.

I've compared Wik to an internet forum on many occasions.

Wik if anything, is entertaining.

[Millennium]

Actually, I do remember Apple being accused of this sort of thing at one point, but I don't remember it being anytime close to September 11. For that matter, I don't remember anything coming out of the accusations.

I suspect that this is the work of one of the accusers. Either that or Paul Thurott.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Actually, I do remember Apple being accused of this sort of thing at one point, but I don't remember it being anytime close to September 11. For that matter, I don't remember anything coming out of the accusations.

I suspect that this is the work of one of the accusers. Either that or Paul Thurott.

Yeah I remember that. It turned out to be a hateful employee that was fired for being a slacker. At least that is what I was told by two other Apple employees.

[Synotic]

Originally posted by chris v:
I guess that makes wickypedia utterly useless, then, doesn't it?

For what it's worth, things like that are usually removed in less than five minutes� it's a pretty active site.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Mastrap:
Nah, generally speaking wikipedia rocks. A great collection of knowedge. It's relatively rare that some idiot feels that he needs to take a dump in any particular article.

The best thing about wikipedia is that anybody can contribute. So if you wanted to write about, say, spelunking, you'd be adding to that knowledge base. Others would then edit your writing adding their own knowledge. A bit like the great libraries of the past, but open to everyone.

To many cooks spoil the broth, no?

I don't trust Wikipedia for anything serious - it's just entertainment value for me. People get things wrong all the time, even when writing and correcting Wiki the best to their knowlegde.

Wikipedia, fun but not a good idea.