CelticWomanForum.com

I don't know if anyone has noticed but Wikipedia has updated information on Mairead.

This is the easiest link you all have to see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A1ir%C3%A9ad_Nesbitt

Awesome!  Thanks for the link Kim.

does anybody actually believe what they read in wikipedia?

It depends on the article.

I did not post this for her birthdate but for the info on her schooling.  I don't care how old anyone is because I don't want anyone to know how old I am. It's a private matter.

Sorry I posted this. I think I've had enough of postings for a long time.

Actually, they've done studies where they took the Encyclopedia Britannica and compared random articles to Wikipedia and in almost every case Wikipedia was as accurate or more up to date.

aislin

Yes.  Almost. 

Now....define almost......as in almost always tells the truth....but.....sometime does not tell the truth.   

Otherwise:  Wikipedia is a part-time liar? ;D


btw....who is the "they" that did those studies?   Wikipedia?
 

The study was conducted by Nature, a UK journal. It compared 42 science articles and found that Wikipedia had 4 errors per article compared to Britannica's 3. However, Wikipedia's articles were, on average, 2.6 times longer then Britanica's. So Wikipedia's rate of error was actually less.

aislin

Well, maybe, but I've come across quite a couple of mistakes on Wikipedia, and that is why I don't rely on it when needing information. There are so many other website which provide sufficient information as well.

Well, aislin, the science articles are more rigorously examined by experts. Articles on celebrities are often riddled with myths (started either by the stars or their enemies), and opinion (both glowing and criticizing) because there are few "experts" with verifiable data. Most material on public figures is not footnoted because if it were it would be from Us magazine, Entertainment Tonight, and promotional materials.

Interestingly, any facts that come directly from a celebrity or from their employers (film studio, record label, etc.) are considered original sourcing and are considered suspect by Wikipedia. Because many publicists tend to fudge things, ALL official material gets treated as potentially false. Supposedly, only things confirmed by second parties are allowed to stay on Wikipedia, although in celebrity articles it may go unnoticed or unchallenged for a long, long time.

For this reason, anytime a CW fan tries to post the fact that Lisa is expecting again, it is deleted because supposedly it hasn't been stated by any other source than Lisa and CW.com!

Think again. She needs to go to a place where she needs it out if it happens instantly.

Well said, Kimberly!

Not well said but really OK.

I created a stub article on Wikipedia for Hibernia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hibernia_(M%C3%A1ir%C3%A9ad_Nesbitt_album)

Lots more work to do on that page (track info, title meaning, chart performance, etc.), but at least there's an article there now.

I updated Mairead's Wikipedia page with info / links to the new Hibernia article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A1ir%C3%A9ad_Nesbitt

I also added the Hibernia album to the Hibernia disambiguation page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hibernia_(disambiguation)

I'll add more to the Hibernia page in a bit depending on how brutal my customary thrashing is at the hands of the wiki auditors.  ::)

  ...again .. thanks  Tom ...   8)

Wow, I guess with the insanely busy start to the year I kind of forgot about tending to this, so the Hibernia article is still kind of a skeleton.

I added an info box on the right today, including an album cover:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hibernia_(M%C3%A1ir%C3%A9ad_Nesbitt_album)

This thing needs serious work (a lot more content because the auditors aren't thrilled with the references or amount of content that are there now. I'll try to do some work on it this week, but any suggestions would be awesome.

Thanks.

I finally got around to adding chart performance to the Hibernia article on Wikipedia.

I also added Devil's Bit Sessions chart performance to Mairead's main article on Wikipedia, since the auditors decided to remove the content from the Devil's Bit Sessions article and turn it into a redirect back to her main Wikipedia article.

Lastly, added Rocktopia info to Mairead's main Wikipedia page.

Let me guess, next the auditors will contend that mentioning the Broadway run is non-noteworthy information, because it's not going to run for 5 years and outsell Hamilton for 60 consecutive months...  ::)