Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Mairead on Wikipedia  (Read 16516 times)
Zo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 453


« on: November 22, 2007, 05:24PM »

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




TO THE ENDS OF THE EARTH....FOREVER FRIENDS
Kimberly AJ
Choir Member
*********
Posts: 17,490


Chloë Agnew will always be my VBIF forever~!


« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2007, 06:11PM »

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


LOOK OUT! ROGUE ROBOTS!
leighlam
Featured Soloist
**********
Posts: 98,123



« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2007, 09:29PM »

Awesome!  Thanks for the link Kim.
Logged

JByrd
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 304



« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2007, 07:18AM »

does anybody actually believe what they read in wikipedia?
Logged

John

JRRacing64
Guest
« Reply #4 on: November 23, 2007, 07:44AM »

does anybody actually believe what they read in wikipedia?

It depends on the article.
Logged
Zo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 453


« Reply #5 on: November 23, 2007, 08:59AM »

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.
Logged




TO THE ENDS OF THE EARTH....FOREVER FRIENDS
aislin
Administrator
Total Fanatic
*****
Posts: 1,315



« Reply #6 on: November 23, 2007, 09:01AM »

does anybody actually believe what they read in wikipedia?

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
Logged
JByrd
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 304



« Reply #7 on: November 23, 2007, 09:18AM »

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? Grin


btw....who is the "they" that did those studies?   Wikipedia?
 
« Last Edit: November 23, 2007, 09:20AM by JByrd » Logged

John

aislin
Administrator
Total Fanatic
*****
Posts: 1,315



« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2007, 10:45AM »

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
Logged
Fiddle_Addict
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 629


Honorary member of the DSA


« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2007, 11:35AM »

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.
Logged


Thanks for this banner, Scott! Smiley

jsharp
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 434



WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2007, 11:50AM »

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!
« Last Edit: November 23, 2007, 06:20PM by jsharp1701 » Logged

“You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” - Anne Lamott

Kimberly AJ
Choir Member
*********
Posts: 17,490


Chloë Agnew will always be my VBIF forever~!


« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2007, 04:26PM »

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


LOOK OUT! ROGUE ROBOTS!
JByrd
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 304



« Reply #12 on: November 24, 2007, 05:54AM »

Well said, Kimberly!
Logged

John

Kimberly AJ
Choir Member
*********
Posts: 17,490


Chloë Agnew will always be my VBIF forever~!


« Reply #13 on: November 24, 2007, 07:32AM »

Not well said but really OK.
Logged


LOOK OUT! ROGUE ROBOTS!
CWazyTom
Honorary Roadie
*******
Posts: 3,447


One CWazy Canadian! Chlovër for life!


« Reply #14 on: January 06, 2017, 01:16AM »

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.  Roll Eyes
Logged

Tara Forum (@TaraMcNeilForum)
http://www.taramcneillforum.com/
https://www.facebook.com/TaraMcNeillForum/

CaraNua Fans (@CaraNuaFans)

Candy Canadiana (@candycanfans)
https://www.facebook.com/CandyCanFans
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: