Cannonfodder80 Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 True, but books are proof read multiple times so the chances of being wrong are far lower. Also sources are listed in books so can be verified. Anyone can write anything on wikipedia. As for not complaining, isn't that the whole point of this thread? If we all stopped then the thread would become redundant Link to post Share on other sites
Xaccers Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 According to The Davinchi Code, yes. However no matter how much "research" Dan Brown does, his books are as historicly accurate as your average story in the Sun so personaly I'd take it with a large pinch of salt Despite his basic writting style, for which the critics love to have a go about, he did somehow do a fantastic job of convincing so many people that DaVinci was actually at the last supper painting what he saw, and that is impressive, or depressive if you consider what it means about the people who thought that. Link to post Share on other sites
FireKnife Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Wikipedia was a great resource when it started and it relied on much more information to back up a source but now it only requires the bear minimum. The reason why a lot of people complain about things like Ai mag taking from Wiki is that they take stuff that anyone with even the basic knowledge of the subject knows is wrong. Often Wiki has now become a place where people can post someone elses wild accusations and get away with it as that does qualify as a citation, wrong or otherwise. Personally i take everything on Wiki with a pinch of salt and instead hunt around more for my info. Admittedly a good 75% is correct but that still leaves a large area that isn't and that is the issue. Though i must say the expansion to create fan Wikis for games / books and sites like IMFDB is a good thing as that way you can get info from things like close up pictures and discussion. 'FireKnife' Link to post Share on other sites
Samm Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Cannonfodder: Everyone's complaining because you're wrong Wikipedia has sources that can be verified as well; it's not the website's fault for misinformation, it's the user. Link to post Share on other sites
paranoiddroid Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 I use the wiki cited list as a base point to study, and as for Dan misereable can't read a map and writes drivelling *suitcase* Brown welll..... Follow his car chase route from the louvre to the US embassy its hilariously in accurate will send you to the wrong side of paris, the embassy is about 5 minutes walk from the gallery and if he cant get that right then.... Link to post Share on other sites
FireKnife Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Follow his car chase route from the louvre to the US embassy its hilariously in accurate will send you to the wrong side of paris, the embassy is about 5 minutes walk from the gallery and if he cant get that right then.... Usually this is to show off an area, rather than have a legitimate chase. I found that when doing a film in a country that is backed by local funding they often want you to put a bit of 'show off the city' while you have cars thundering around and bullets whizzing by. Just look at From Paris With Love and Kiss of the Dragon lots of different areas of Paris to show off the city in some scenes. 'FireKnife' Link to post Share on other sites
spetsnazdave87 Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 True, but books are proof read multiple times so the chances of being wrong are far lower. Also sources are listed in books so can be verified. Anyone can write anything on wikipedia. Your faith in the publishing industry is disturbing... proof-reading is for spelling and grammar only; intellectual arguments, history and facts are left to the author to check, both fiction and non-fiction. Historians call each other liars all the time. Link to post Share on other sites
FireKnife Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Historians call each other liars all the time. With the missus studying History it is amazing how many contradicting sources she has to look into for her course, some of them are simple things like a day here or there while some claim that entire Nazi death camps didn't exist or that Henry 8th had a varying number of wives. 'FireKnife' Link to post Share on other sites
Xaccers Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Follow his car chase route from the louvre to the US embassy its hilariously in accurate will send you to the wrong side of paris, the embassy is about 5 minutes walk from the gallery and if he cant get that right then.... That's nothing, in one of the stories of Cu Culainn he goes all over Ireland when he only needed to go about 50 miles. For one who's original name means "he who knows the way" that's a pretty impressive detour! Link to post Share on other sites
Seraphim989 Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 With the missus studying History it is amazing how many contradicting sources she has to look into for her course, some of them are simple things like a day here or there while some claim that entire Nazi death camps didn't exist or that Henry 8th had a varying number of wives. 'FireKnife' Gah, I know that feel. While researching for a recent paper I wrote, I found sources on the number of Muslims in China that varied by as much as a factor of 10. I rarely found two sources that agreed with each other Link to post Share on other sites
Cannonfodder80 Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Ok proof reading wasn't the correct phrase to use. However I'm sure the content is looked at as I doubt any author is going to potentally risk their future publishing prospects by not researching their chosen topic. If they release a book which is full of absolute *suitcase* and so doesn't sell then publishers will think twice before publishing said author's later work. With wikipedia the person verifing the info could be anyone so there are no repercussions apart from people spreading ###### information Link to post Share on other sites
spetsnazdave87 Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 You'd be surprised. Link to post Share on other sites
Seraphim989 Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Except there are also dedicated editors on wikipedia who check articles regularly. When al-Zarqawi was killed a few years back I made a tiny edit on his wikipedia article. I changed "bla bla bla was killed on bla bla bla in his safehouse" to "bla bla bla was killed on bla bla bla in his not-so-safehouse" and it had been reverted within hours. Wikipedia wants to maintain a good reputation just as publishers do, so they do edit regularly Link to post Share on other sites
FireKnife Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 However I'm sure the content is looked at as I doubt any author is going to potentally risk their future publishing prospects by not researching their chosen topic. You ever read any Chris Ryan / Andy McNab / Chicklit Though i suppose it is fiction, you can make any *badger*s up. 'FireKnife' Link to post Share on other sites
Cannonfodder80 Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 These editors cannot be experts on all subjects so will be looking for spelling, punctuation and grammar mistakes along with ###### takes like your edit. Also IIRC wikipedia only has about 12 members of staff on its books and most of their time is spent on admin issues. Fireknife: yes they are all fiction so I don't expect them to inform me I expect to be entertained and bitching about this would be like moaning Star Wars isn't realistic. Put simply I treat wikipedia like information posted on the zeroin forum. Some of it is true and some is total horse *suitcase* so if I'm researching a topic there are far better sources available Link to post Share on other sites
FireKnife Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Fireknife: yes they are all fiction so I don't expect them to inform me I expect to be entertained and bitching about this would be like moaning Star Wars isn't realistic. Calm down and have a cup of tea, i was doing my usual injectin of humour into a situation 'FireKnife' Link to post Share on other sites
Seraphim989 Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 I made it Arnie's friendly Link to post Share on other sites
White_Rabbit Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 now now ladies Link to post Share on other sites
Cannonfodder80 Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Appologies, I had a momentary sense of humour failiure due to dealing with moronic w*****s at work all day, normal service has been resumed. Milk and 2 sugars if your putting the kettle on Edit: oops a naughty word got past the filter Link to post Share on other sites
White_Rabbit Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 ....dealing with moronic wankers at work all day... I call them customers Link to post Share on other sites
Hedganian Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 WTF? W*nker isn't filtered but wh0re is?? Link to post Share on other sites
Cannonfodder80 Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 I call them customers Unfortunatly for me they're also called work colleages. Hedganian, I guess that's because soliciting is illegal but onanism isn't. Anyway my new rant for today is muppet drivers who don't use their mirrors. I've just had a month off work from a broken arm and don't need another Link to post Share on other sites
mattmanic Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Have reported everyone in this thread for circumventing the swear filter kthnxbai. Lol. JK. I'm not a d1ck. Can we have another game of make up words and phrases which could be rude but are, in fact, not and so it's fine to say them? Hwagan is usually good at this... I will start us off with "cheese nibbler" It can be used thusly: You are a dirty cheese nibbler aren't you?! You have a nice cheese nibbler Where are you going with my cheese nibbler you *fruitcage* cheese nibbler *fruitcage* *suitcase* ###### *wheelbarrow* cheese nibbler *albartroth* *bramston pickle* Link to post Share on other sites
White_Rabbit Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Monkey tickler Link to post Share on other sites
danielsilva Posted May 9, 2011 Report Share Posted May 9, 2011 Fireknifer Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.