I edited my first Wikipedia entry!

I feel so very 2004. I just updated the Wikipedia entry for the Women in Refrigerators concept. I added the new URL (the old one now belongs to someone in Estonia who has the strange sense of irony to put porno on a site discussing the brutal exploitation of female characters for a quick kick of drama) and changed the name away from “Girlfriends-in-Refrigerators,” which is a baffling change that seems to have come from the misremembering of whoever posted the original entry.

I’m not a huge fan of Wikipedia in general — I think it represents itself as being far too authoritative despite being open to a whole lot of monkeying around (I didn’t have to register to make any of the changes to Wikipedia, despite their announcement that would be required) — but it’s useful for quick and dirty info, or informal distribution of information, so long as you go into it knowing that they’re possibly full of crap. If they’d move their disclaimer link up from being the very last word on the entire page up to near the top, I’d be a lot happier with it, since people might click it and realize why there has to be a disclaimer there at all.

I also notice that Gail herself has a Wikipedia entry. Damn it, I want to be interesting enough to merit one.

• Update: Fred has stepped in, fixed the name of the WiR entry, greatly expanded it, and put in an homage to the late, great Rob Harris, whom I think all of us who knew him still miss regularly and terribly.

11 Comments »

1. When you look at the edit history it shows the IP in place of a username. I swear it used to show a user name or anon for non-registered folk. Maybe this is part of the plan, though IPs are not very identifying.

   Comment by Nicole — January 11, 2006 @ 18:13

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointy_hat

   Ahhh the joys of Wiki. It was built up over time to be truly magnificent!

   Comment by Dmitry — January 11, 2006 @ 19:25

3. http://www.boingboing.net/2006/01/11/correcting_the_recor.html

   Interesting piece by Cory Doctorow on how bad journalism is worse than bad Wiki-ing (Wiking).

   Comment by Dmitry — January 11, 2006 @ 19:56

4. You probably know, but Nature magazine did a study that indicated Wikipedia is virtually as good as Britannica:

   Jimmy Wales’ Wikipedia comes close to Britannica in terms of the accuracy of its science entries, a Nature investigation finds.

   Comment by Joel — January 11, 2006 @ 20:04

5. Plus, if anyone had found any inaccuracies in your post (of the hundreds of people that squat on the new/edited entries thread), I’m sure your failings would have been corrected. Possibly you should test a more widely known or controversial topic.

   Comment by Joel — January 11, 2006 @ 20:05

6. Well, the point wasn’t a test, it was to get WiR away from teh pr0n. I was just grousing.

   “Interesting piece by Cory Doctorow on how bad journalism is worse than bad Wiki-ing (Wiking).”

   Pffft, bad journalism bothers me more than you know. But as you know, counselor, there’s all sorts of legal penalties if someone fucks around with the truth in the news. Wikipedia is so far exempt from such legal remedies, as are the fucker-arounders.

   Comment by Beau — January 11, 2006 @ 22:50

7. I’ve been making light contributions to Wiki since October. While I am amazed that they still allow anonymous posting, I have to admit that I have found the community there pretty vigilant and rigorous.

   I had to engage in a week long debate just to keep my article about Komikwerks posted. It was seen as a vanity article on a “niche” subject (lacking the broad appeal of, say, “pointy hats”). Still, the wecomics community on Wiki sided with me and the article stayed and was only improved after that.

   Also, I do find that I now keep a regular eye on any article I’ve contributed to and have been johnny-on-the-spot fixing vandalisations to “Stan Lee” and some others.

   So, the door is still open for ass-foolery, but it does seem that the community responds quickly and keeps Wiki in credible shape.

   Comment by Robbo — January 12, 2006 @ 5:50

8. Hey, hey, hey, pointy hats are a lot more important than you might realize.

   Comment by Beau — January 12, 2006 @ 8:54

9. WTF! You’re STOOPEEED GEK comic CRAP should AEN RIGHT THE F DOWN to make ROOM FOR MORE ON POINTY HATS AND PRETTY GNOME PONIES!!!

   Fucker…. talking down about Pointy HATS! I am gnna BITE YOUR GNADS OFF!

   Comment by Dmitry — January 12, 2006 @ 16:55

10. WTF! Your STOOPEEED GEEK comic CRAP should BE TAKEN RIGHT THE F DOWN to make ROOM FOR MORE ON POINTY HATS AND PRETTY GNOME PONIES!!!

    BASTAGE…. talking down about Pointy HATS! I am gonna BITE YOUR GNADS OFF!

    Comment by Dmitry — January 12, 2006 @ 16:56

11. OOPS REPOST FROM INSANITEEEEE!!!!!!!

    EES thees a SERIOUS BLOG!??? OH FRUG I HATE YOU ALLL L ESPECIALLLY FREEEKING ANYTY GNOME POINTEE HAT PEOPLE!!!!

    Comment by Dmitry — January 12, 2006 @ 16:57

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>