× Register Login What's New! Contact us
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 Last
Results 1 to 20 of 49 visibility 7136

Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

  1. #1
    Anwarica's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Inside my mind
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    239
    Threads
    26
    Rep Power
    103
    Rep Ratio
    50
    Likes Ratio
    0

    Smile Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Report bad ads?


    I've some questions about the English wikipedia, kindly if you are a wikipedian or know how to solve those issue, I will be glad for your help

    1. If there's an article without citation [citation needed] can I delete that paragraph because it doesn't have any citation? deleting because I don't agree with it

    2. Regarding Islamic articles, can I provide an Arabic citation to English Islamic articles?

    Jazakum Allah khairan
    chat Quote

  2. Report bad ads?
  3. #2
    جوري's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Soldier Through It!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    من ارض الكنانة
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    27,759
    Threads
    1260
    Rep Power
    259
    Rep Ratio
    89
    Likes Ratio
    23

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Anyone can re-write, makeup, conciliate whatever they want on wiki... I can't tell you how many times I have done it..
    To me it is not a credible cyclopaedia.. I am not sure why people choose to cite their articles from that source?.. it has almost become the mcdoanlds of the cyber world.. a one stop for all your quick learning needs
    read this akhi
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6947532.stm
    I get rather furious when I see it as a source at the end of some charged piece.. an article after the next crescendoes.. and then I spot wiki at the end.. I stop reading, and I lose respect for the poster.I am actually rather grateful for those who post it in the beginning of the page rather than the end, since they save me the trouble...
    Anyhow I hope insha'Allah I didn't say anything upsetting? I am sorry I couldn't be of more help, but I don't think it would make a difference whether a citation is there or not, and the whole site should be binned!
    Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Text without context is pretext
    If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him 44845203 1 - Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    chat Quote

  4. #3
    Anwarica's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Inside my mind
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    239
    Threads
    26
    Rep Power
    103
    Rep Ratio
    50
    Likes Ratio
    0

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Nothing upsetting, I agree with you about the credibility of wikipedia, here's another site that disclose some facts:
    http://wired.reddit.com/wikidgame

    Most people depend on wikipedia and that bothers me when some articles are biased without proper citations
    chat Quote

  5. #4
    IbnAbdulHakim's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Addict
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fighting4Emaan
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    16,476
    Threads
    356
    Rep Power
    165
    Rep Ratio
    46
    Likes Ratio
    4

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    CIA tampering with wiki :confused:
    Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    -
    My tears testify that i have a heart
    yet i feel me and shaytan never part
    -
    chat Quote

  6. Report bad ads?
  7. #5
    جوري's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Soldier Through It!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    من ارض الكنانة
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    27,759
    Threads
    1260
    Rep Power
    259
    Rep Ratio
    89
    Likes Ratio
    23

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    format_quote Originally Posted by Anwarica View Post
    Nothing upsetting, I agree with you about the credibility of wikipedia, here's another site that disclose some facts:
    http://wired.reddit.com/wikidgame

    Most people depend on wikipedia and that bothers me when some articles are biased without proper citations
    I agree with you.. al7mdlilah someone sees it from my point of view :smile:

    format_quote Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim View Post
    CIA tampering with wiki :confused:
    Oh yeah.. and that is only what they are willing to admit to.. only God knows about their little cyber soldiers out there and what they choose to keep classified.
    Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Text without context is pretext
    If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him 44845203 1 - Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    chat Quote

  8. #6
    Science101's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Agnosticism
    Posts
    242
    Threads
    19
    Rep Power
    103
    Rep Ratio
    24
    Likes Ratio
    6

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    format_quote Originally Posted by Anwarica View Post

    1. If there's an article without citation [citation needed] can I delete that paragraph because it doesn't have any citation? deleting because I don't agree with it
    From what I understand there is an automated system in place to prevent someone from making deletions without a good reason for it. Not even the CIA has that much control on the information and may in fact help balance out the content since they are history buffs and people who know a lot about what is going on in the world.

    If you can be more specific as to what you want to remove and why then I might be able to better judge your chances of getting others to approve of your change. They can easily put it back in, if that does not happen automatically.
    Last edited by Science101; 09-03-2007 at 05:54 PM. Reason: grammar
    chat Quote

  9. #7
    جوري's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Soldier Through It!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    من ارض الكنانة
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    27,759
    Threads
    1260
    Rep Power
    259
    Rep Ratio
    89
    Likes Ratio
    23

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    I'll be posting a series of articles on wiki for those who like to keep a clean spirit and observe integrity in a debate!
    Golfer Fuzzy Zoeller sues over vandalized Wikipedia page
    Submitted by Layer 8 on Thu, 02/22/2007 - 7:20pm.
    Pro golfer Fuzzy Zoeller is suing to track down the author of what Zoeller says is a defamatory paragraph about him on the Wikipedia site.

    In an Associated Press story Zoeller's attorney, Scott Sheftall, said he filed a lawsuit against a Miami firm last week because the law won't allow him to sue Wikipedia. "Courts have clearly said you have to go after the source of the information," Sheftall said. "The Zoeller family wants to take a stand to put a stop to this. Otherwise, we're all just victims of the Internet vandals out there. They ought not to be able to act with impunity."

    The Smoking Gun Website says Zoeller, 55, found his Wikipedia profile tainted in late December from a computer with an IP address that he tracked back to Josef Silny & Associates, a Miami law firm. In a Florida Circuit Court complaint filed last week, Zoeller - who is identified as "John Doe" - notes that his Wikipedia page was altered to include his alleged admission to alcohol and drug problems. The Wikipedia entry in question has been purged.
    http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/11769
    Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Text without context is pretext
    If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him 44845203 1 - Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    chat Quote

  10. #8
    جوري's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Soldier Through It!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    من ارض الكنانة
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    27,759
    Threads
    1260
    Rep Power
    259
    Rep Ratio
    89
    Likes Ratio
    23

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    here is another
    Fake professor in Wikipedia storm

    Volunteers write and edit the site's thousands of articles
    Internet site Wikipedia has been hit by controversy after the disclosure that a prominent editor had assumed a false identity complete with fake PhD.
    The editor, known as Essjay, had described himself as a professor of religion at a private university.

    But he was in fact Ryan Jordan, 24, a college student from Kentucky who used texts such as Catholicism for Dummies. He has now retired from the site.

    Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia open to all, written by volunteers worldwide.

    'Trust and tolerance'

    Under the name Essjay, Mr Jordan edited articles and also had the authority to arbitrate disputes between authors.

    In his user profile, he said he taught both undergraduate and graduate theology, and in an interview with the New Yorker in July 2006, was described as a "tenured professor of religion".

    His real identity came to light last week when the magazine added an editorial note to the piece highlighting the deception.

    "At the time of publication, neither we nor Wikipedia knew Essjay's real name," the note said.

    Essjay told them he hid his identity because "he feared personal retribution from those he had ruled against online", the magazine's note said.

    Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, writing on the site on 3 March, said that Mr Jordan was apologetic, but that Wikipedia was "based on twin pillars of trust and tolerance".

    "Despite my personal forgiveness, I hope that he will accept my resignation request, because forgiveness or not, these positions are not appropriate for him now," he wrote.

    And in a post the next day, Mr Jordan announced his retirement from the site.

    "I hope others will refocus the energy they have spent the past few days in defending and denouncing me to make something here at Wikipedia better," he said.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6423659.stm
    Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Text without context is pretext
    If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him 44845203 1 - Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    chat Quote

  11. #9
    Science101's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Agnosticism
    Posts
    242
    Threads
    19
    Rep Power
    103
    Rep Ratio
    24
    Likes Ratio
    6

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    The golfer story is an interesting "he said she said" story but from that there is no way to tell who is telling the truth.

    Fake PhD's are also very common all over the internet, especially with Christian Creationists. No surprise Wiki had one too. The good thing is that Wiki took care of it but that is not the case with all the others still using diploma mills to trick people into thinking they are an authority on something they don't even understand.

    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html
    Last edited by Science101; 09-03-2007 at 06:46 PM. Reason: add detail
    chat Quote

  12. Report bad ads?
  13. #10
    جوري's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Soldier Through It!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    من ارض الكنانة
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    27,759
    Threads
    1260
    Rep Power
    259
    Rep Ratio
    89
    Likes Ratio
    23

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    I suppose the only licit thing left to do, is go to wiki and let it define the 'truth' for us!


    peace!
    Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Text without context is pretext
    If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him 44845203 1 - Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    chat Quote

  14. #11
    Science101's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Agnosticism
    Posts
    242
    Threads
    19
    Rep Power
    103
    Rep Ratio
    24
    Likes Ratio
    6

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    No matter where you go there is no way to tell who's truth you're reading. I have found Wiki to be surprisingly accurate.
    chat Quote

  15. #12
    جوري's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Soldier Through It!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    من ارض الكنانة
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    27,759
    Threads
    1260
    Rep Power
    259
    Rep Ratio
    89
    Likes Ratio
    23

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Pls don't take this possibility of favorable combination and circumstance and sneak in the talkorigins.. this has nothing to do with evolution or creation or diploma mills... not every thread needs to do down that path.. especially when persistent unresolved ailments have been pointed out to you in each and everyone of such discussions-- this has to do with the credibility of wiki as a source-- and I believe an article after the next has defined that for us so that it is crystal.

    You want to go ahead and use it, no one will stop you..many people still do, however your believability might be on the line. And I don't believe you'll be engaged on a full-bodied level, when the very foundation of your disputation is troubled at the roots!

    peace!
    Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Text without context is pretext
    If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him 44845203 1 - Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    chat Quote

  16. #13
    Anwarica's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Inside my mind
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    239
    Threads
    26
    Rep Power
    103
    Rep Ratio
    50
    Likes Ratio
    0

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Since last year, I've been depending on wikipedia regarding articles about international cuisines only not any other articles
    chat Quote

  17. #14
    Science101's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Agnosticism
    Posts
    242
    Threads
    19
    Rep Power
    103
    Rep Ratio
    24
    Likes Ratio
    6

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    PurestAmbrosia, No encyclopedia is 100% perfect, or complete. And compared to the internet at large, Wiki is far more balanced than all the websites that are out there twisting the truth. As someone who has had to deal with outright misinformation on the web, I see people falling for it all the time. Wiki has a much higher standard than that.

    If you have a better free encyclopedia then post a link. But I doubt you'll find one. And I found Britannica to be very incomplete so even the ones that you have to pay for have problems.

    I would like to challenge you to find one entry that can be easily proven to be false. Not an article claiming one is, but one commonly used entry from Wiki that is obviously not true. If it is bad as you are claiming it is then you should have no problem finding numerous errors to show as examples. Your believability is now on the line.

    And I must add that you still don't know what the person who started this topic wants to delete. Why wasn't that one of your first questions? How do you know they don't want to erase something that is true and important? I'm not saying that they do, but how do you know you're not part of the problem you're now describing, instead of part of the solution? I asked them for more information, you didn't.



    Anwarica, I have found their science content very helpful. Only source that is usually up to date.

    And you must let me know what you want changed. I'm just curious.
    Last edited by Science101; 09-03-2007 at 07:46 PM.
    chat Quote

  18. Report bad ads?
  19. #15
    جوري's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Soldier Through It!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    من ارض الكنانة
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    27,759
    Threads
    1260
    Rep Power
    259
    Rep Ratio
    89
    Likes Ratio
    23

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    format_quote Originally Posted by Science101 View Post
    PurestAmbrosia, No encyclopedia is 100% perfect, or complete. And compared to the internet at large, Wiki is far more balanced than all the websites that are out there twisting the truth. As someone who has had to deal with outright misinformation on the web, I see people falling for it all the time. Wiki has a much higher standard than that.
    I don't use FREE encyclopedias, call me old fashioned but I still think books and libraries and proper references have a place in this free fast world of ours!

    If you have a better free encyclopedia then post a link. But I doubt you'll find one. And I found Britannica to be very incomplete so even the ones that you have to pay for have problems.
    I have a subscription to the online Britannica, it comes courtesy of upgrading your books, not meant as a sole source! encyclopedia's are meant to give facts NOT OPINIONS--even if to remotely evoke them~!
    I would like to challenge you to find one entry that can be easily proven to be false. Not an article claiming one is, but one commonly used entry from Wiki that is obviously not true. If it is bad as you are claiming it is then you should have no problem finding numerous errors to show as examples. Your believability is now on the line.
    I found plenty of articles that are false, including some of very basic suras in the Quran, which I had to go in and fix.. how would you judge it to be true or false, Are you an exegetical expert? I was sitting there with an ibn katheer tafseer to try to correct some immense errors. How much do you know about fiqh and tafseer to make that challenge? Further, I find it sort of laughable your quest, after the three above articles that I have posted! Are you kidding me? or would you like a presidential address?

    And I must add that you still don't know what the person who started this topic wants to delete. Why wasn't that one of your first questions? How do you know they don't want to erase something that is true and important? I'm not saying that they do, but how do you know you're not part of the problem you're now describing, instead of part of the solution? I asked them for more information, you didn't.
    I don't understand what your point is with this affirmation.. if something is confutable in part it is confutable as a whole..
    Would you take a medication that has been recalled even though a few bottles have been tainted and not the whole lot?
    Again it is really up to you... but what works for you, doesn't work for everyone.. Some folks value and guard their credibility
    peace!
    Last edited by جوري; 09-03-2007 at 08:11 PM. Reason: Quotation error
    Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Text without context is pretext
    If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him 44845203 1 - Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    chat Quote

  20. #16
    Science101's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Agnosticism
    Posts
    242
    Threads
    19
    Rep Power
    103
    Rep Ratio
    24
    Likes Ratio
    6

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    I would not even want to edit religious topics. They are usually open to interpretation and can be fought over forever. I can just imagine a topic on the "the one true God". You would change it to Allah, someone else would change it to Jesus, an Atheist would claim there is none, and back and forth that one would go. I cannot be sure if that's what you ended up in a dispute over, or not, but it's not a clear example of Wiki being a bad source of basic information. Whenever I need it to show others of something that I remember happening it's what I recalled being true. Biggest problem I found is it being incomplete, but otherwise it's still much better than nothing.

    My mentioning your not asking for more information is simply good practice. It's hard to be helpful if you don't know what it is the person wants to do. For all you know it could be something that you wrote that they want to delete.
    chat Quote

  21. #17
    جوري's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Soldier Through It!
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    من ارض الكنانة
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    27,759
    Threads
    1260
    Rep Power
    259
    Rep Ratio
    89
    Likes Ratio
    23

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    format_quote Originally Posted by Science101 View Post

    My mentioning your not asking for more information is simply good practice. It's hard to be helpful if you don't know what it is the person wants to do. For all you know it could be something that you wrote that they want to delete.
    I have nothing to defend.. everything I have corrected was properly cited from illustrious and recognized sources!.. though, I later came to accept, that it was a waste of my time.. Since not everyone out there has the most noble of intentions! and I believe I have adequately certified that from various sources!
    Anyone who is decent and wished to acquaint and engage his audience, will at some point figure out what is trash and of no great value... and what has been labored upon for verity and will withstand the test of time long after such sites have been closed down!

    peace!
    Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    Text without context is pretext
    If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him 44845203 1 - Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    chat Quote

  22. #18
    Anwarica's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Inside my mind
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    239
    Threads
    26
    Rep Power
    103
    Rep Ratio
    50
    Likes Ratio
    0

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    format_quote Originally Posted by Science101 View Post
    Anwarica, I have found their science content very helpful. Only source that is usually up to date.

    And you must let me know what you want changed. I'm just curious.
    For instance, I created this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_hip_screw
    It looks like a stupid page, yet it's important for medical students who study orthopedics to know Garden's classification and DHS .. yet the pics were removed due to copyright? although I selected the right copyright options after a while

    Anyway, have a look at this:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_L._Moore
    It's about Keith Moore, the one who witnessed that prophet Muhammed is the messenger of Allah (That's a video for him saying so) .. in such article, how could they provide this funny link:
    http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-myths-embryology.htm and they describe it as a site claims errors in Quran .. well, it's too much! 1st it's Not a scientific site .. 2nd it's called bible.ca means it's not scientific again .. 3rd they have absurd articles which can be considered stupid/funny .. they are talking about daughters of God in Islam?? how on earth could someone cite such a site? I think they only should cite it for humor! and it's even offending to use it as humor.

    The page I wanted to edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coptic_...quest_of_Egypt
    Formerly (18 August) they wrote: gradual forced conversions to Islam .. it was even without a citation! .. now, someone edited it and provided the citation to be: the gradual conversions to Islam .. as you notice, one word could turn the meaning into something else!
    chat Quote

  23. #19
    Science101's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Agnosticism
    Posts
    242
    Threads
    19
    Rep Power
    103
    Rep Ratio
    24
    Likes Ratio
    6

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    It looks like this debate could go on forever! Some people consider a source like Dr. Kent Hovind to be "properly cited from illustrious and recognized sources!" but the Wiki community would know that what he said is probably just unsupportable junk he fabricated in his own mind. But I'll believe that you had better references than that.

    Like I said, Wiki is not perfect, but it often comes in very handy. It's not my only source of information. And in time it will improve. I see no reason to trash it.
    chat Quote

  24. Report bad ads?
  25. #20
    Science101's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Agnosticism
    Posts
    242
    Threads
    19
    Rep Power
    103
    Rep Ratio
    24
    Likes Ratio
    6

    Re: Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?

    format_quote Originally Posted by Anwarica View Post
    For instance, I created this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_hip_screw
    It looks like a stupid page, yet it's important for medical students who study orthopedics to know Garden's classification and DHS .. yet the pics were removed due to copyright? although I selected the right copyright options after a while
    That is an excellent thing to add! Hopefully it will be made even better.

    format_quote Originally Posted by Anwarica View Post
    Anyway, have a look at this:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_L._Moore
    It's about Keith Moore, the one who witnessed that prophet Muhammed is the messenger of Allah (That's a video for him saying so) .. in such article, how could they provide this funny link:
    http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-myths-embryology.htm and they describe it as a site claims errors in Quran .. well, it's too much! 1st it's Not a scientific site .. 2nd it's called bible.ca means it's not scientific again .. 3rd they have absurd articles which can be considered stupid/funny .. they are talking about daughters of God in Islam?? how on earth could someone cite such a site? I think they only should cite it for humor! and it's even offending to use it as humor.
    Yes, I recognise the source! It is only humourous to consider them a reliable source of science. It's like I mentioned earlier to PurestAmbrosia. Religious topics can go back and forth forever.

    Here's how Wiki handles it. I do have to say that providing both sides of the issue is not a bad idea. There are other ways this information being claimed was unknowable at the time could have been known. You might disagree with them, but they have a right to challenge the conclusions. Best to see both sides than let one side write what they want.

    Moore is frequently quoted by Islamic-oriented websites seeking to validate the divinity of the Qur'an:

    The Quran on Human Embryonic Development
    Embryology

    and by websites seeking to refute it's divinity, or which take a more neutral stance:

    Scientific errors and the myth of embryology in the Koran
    Embryology in the Qur'an
    format_quote Originally Posted by Anwarica View Post
    The page I wanted to edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coptic_...quest_of_Egypt
    Formerly (18 August) they wrote: gradual forced conversions to Islam .. it was even without a citation! .. now, someone edited it and provided the citation to be: the gradual conversions to Islam .. as you notice, one word could turn the meaning into something else!
    That's another religion charged topic that could be in dispute for ages to come. But if you can cite verifiable manuscripts written in that period that would prove it either way then it would be hard for anyone to challenge.
    Last edited by Science101; 09-03-2007 at 09:23 PM.
    chat Quote


  26. Hide
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 Last
Hey there! Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia? Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Are there any wikipedians or anyone understands wikipedia?
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. He understands his wife and respects her feelings
    By madeenahsh in forum Family & Society
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 05-07-2009, 11:28 PM
  2. Wikipedia featured article of the day
    By AHMED_GUREY in forum General
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-02-2007, 07:17 PM
  3. Wikipedia false imformation.
    By Hashim_507 in forum General
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-26-2007, 07:56 AM
  4. Muslim Wikipedia
    By al-fateh in forum General
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-30-2006, 11:59 AM
  5. Wikipedia Needs Editors with The TRUTH
    By oiboy in forum World Affairs
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-06-2006, 06:01 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
create