nightwheel wrote:When I go edit a artical on wikipedia I make sure that I have the facts strait before I do anything. I have even made my own topic on wikipedia here. It's not much but it's all true. And people crap up wikipedia because they are pain in the rears. And because they can and no one can stop them from craping it up.
I sure hope your spelling and stuff is better on the wiki
Life of Brian wrote:
RYW wrote:RYW:
Rare
Yellow
Weasel
I'll be honest with you - I would have never guessed that.
nightwheel wrote:When I go edit a artical on wikipedia I make sure that I have the facts strait before I do anything. I have even made my own topic on wikipedia here. It's not much but it's all true. And people crap up wikipedia because they are pain in the rears. And because they can and no one can stop them from craping it up.
I sure hope your spelling and stuff is better on the wiki
IT is better there because I have to somewhat perfection there.
Who knows if the Namco Portable will ever become a reality?
People crap on Wikipedia because they can. Simple as that. People think that they're funny or rebellious by editing articles and adding in immature, purile statements.
Sure, I hate it, but what can you do when it's open to editing from anyone? It's bound to happen, sad fact of life.
I like Wikipedia because I often find info on things I'd never even thought about before. You can waste loads of time on it just searching for whatever you think of and seeing what comes up.
Here's something to do... if your teacher says that, you should say something along the lines of.
"OH! SO history books should be thrown out cause a lot of stuff about them are inaccurate and people change them to suit their needs. Look at Paul Revere's Ride."
We used to do this at school all the time before they blocked to site. I remember once on nintendo's page there was a section called "my wang", and how my friends used to harrass each other on the hometowns page,
timmeh87 wrote:I think everyone is forgetting the most obvious solution of "using as much wiki as you want and then just citing some books you didnt read"
worked all the time for me.
Hm, thats a good idea. I'm doing a research paper on Mars Rovers, and NASA and JPL don't have jack on their sites, so I'll just use Wikipedia and cite the government sites.
People vandalize Wikipedia because they're immature, and the idea that people can freely edit a website is a novelty to them. Why can't they find novelty in using that freedom to contribute constructively to an article?
