wsox8 10 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 What is a joke account?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Searc...count&go=Go http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose Link to post Share on other sites
The Don't Jar 0 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 I'd love to put something inside you.tell me about it... studi accept fully rolled coin as well Link to post Share on other sites
Djsasso 0 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RoseI miss the humor in this. Link to post Share on other sites
TwstdWrstr 10 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 and they say FCP is going downhill... Link to post Share on other sites
Djsasso 0 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 None of the information in the original article was false. All of it was factually accurate. Although one statement contained in the article may have been slightly tongue-in-cheek, it was clearly just that, and by no means warrants deletion of the entire article. I was under the impression that the point of wikipedia was to collect knowledge. It is not your responsibility or your right to decide who or what is worthy of an article, assuming that article is factually accurate. Please spend your time correcting articles that have egregious factual errors. I have read many articles on historical figures and events which contain either terrible grammar, factual inaccuracies, statements of opinion, or all of the above.Examples? Link to post Share on other sites
timwakefield 68 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Examples?I'm busy playing poker. If you want this thread to turn into a wiki-mistake thread, I'll keep bumping it when I find some. I used to have an account on wiki (same name as here), but I found that often the articles that needed editing had been locked from edits. I understand the reason for it sometimes, but it discouraged me from contributing more. Link to post Share on other sites
Suited_Up 2 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Further evidence that Zach needs a page: http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...howtopic=129283 Link to post Share on other sites
FARGOpokerND 22 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Examples?Listen, we all appreciate what you, and others like you, do for Wikipedia. There are many people out there that knowingly stick in meaningless and inaccurate facts on pages. If there was a way for us to get credible sources that you would find "acceptable", I am sure we would do it. But there is none and we mean NO harm by this, but this is something we did for someone that is more famous than most people are.Just go pick on more people, because that is what it is coming off as right now. You are picking a fight over something that really doesn't have to be fought over. Link to post Share on other sites
Djsasso 0 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 I'm busy playing poker. If you want this thread to turn into a wiki-mistake thread, I'll keep bumping it when I find some. I used to have an account on wiki (same name as here), but I found that often the articles that needed editing had been locked from edits. I understand the reason for it sometimes, but it discouraged me from contributing more.Bring on the bumps. Nothing, well not nothing, makes me happier then making sure that Wikipedia is as accurate as can be. It has the possibility to be one of the greatest resources of knowledge around. I'm sorry that the articles that have been locked discourage you from contributing. I'm sure that is not the plan of the developers but sometimes an article can get out of hand much like a flaming thread in a forum. Link to post Share on other sites
Djsasso 0 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Listen, we all appreciate what you, and others like you, do for Wikipedia. There are many people out there that knowingly stick in meaningless and inaccurate facts on pages. If there was a way for us to get credible sources that you would find "acceptable", I am sure we would do it. But there is none and we mean NO harm by this, but this is something we did for someone that is more famous than most people are.Just go pick on more people, because that is what it is coming off as right now. You are picking a fight over something that really doesn't have to be fought over.I don't mean to come off as the "bad cop" but someone brought this to my attention and asked me to check it out. I am beginning to think that it may have been someone that Zach reprimanded at some time and this is their way of getting back at him. I hate that I have been drug in the middle of this feud. Link to post Share on other sites
FARGOpokerND 22 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 I don't mean to come off as the "bad cop" but someone brought this to my attention and asked me to check it out. I am beginning to think that it may have been someone that Zach reprimanded at some time and this is their way of getting back at him. I hate that I have been drug in the middle of this feud.Why anyone would report it to you is beyond me, but this is a battle you CAN get out of. We just want our fearless leader's page to stay up. Link to post Share on other sites
James D 0 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Hold on, is this the real djsasso?I'm 60/40, in favour of it being a joke, but that's down from 90/10... 10 minutes ago. Link to post Share on other sites
Djsasso 0 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Why anyone would report it to you is beyond me, but this is a battle you CAN get out of. We just want our fearless leader's page to stay up.Edited for Mr. McFold. Link to post Share on other sites
vbnautilus 48 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 None of the information in the original article was false. All of it was factually accurate. Although one statement contained in the article may have been slightly tongue-in-cheek, it was clearly just that, and by no means warrants deletion of the entire article. I was under the impression that the point of wikipedia was to collect knowledge. It is not your responsibility or your right to decide who or what is worthy of an article, assuming that article is factually accurate. Please spend your time correcting articles that have egregious factual errors. I have read many articles on historical figures and events which contain either terrible grammar, factual inaccuracies, statements of opinion, or all of the above. Listen, we all appreciate what you, and others like you, do for Wikipedia. There are many people out there that knowingly stick in meaningless and inaccurate facts on pages. If there was a way for us to get credible sources that you would find "acceptable", I am sure we would do it. But there is none and we mean NO harm by this, but this is something we did for someone that is more famous than most people are.Just go pick on more people, because that is what it is coming off as right now. You are picking a fight over something that really doesn't have to be fought over.Pretty sure you guys have been severely leveled here. Nevertheless, while I personally support the inclusion of poker greats such as Henderson, and I have greatly enjoyed the campaign to keep his page, in reality the page quite clearly does not meet the notability requirements established by the wikipedia community. We can argue that the policy should be changed, but until it does, this is (unfortunately) a losing battle. "It is not your responsibility or your right to decide who or what is worthy of an article, assuming that article is factually accurate." -- this is indeed one of the responsibilities of wikipedia readers. Link to post Share on other sites
chgocubs99 0 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Hold on, is this the real djsasso?I'm 60/40, in favour of it being a joke, but that's down from 90/10... 10 minutes ago.I'm still well above 90/10 Link to post Share on other sites
FARGOpokerND 22 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Pretty sure you guys have been severely leveled here. Nevertheless, while I personally support the inclusion of poker greats such as Henderson, and I have greatly enjoyed the campaign to keep his page, in reality the page quite clearly does not meet the notability requirements established by the wikipedia community. We can argue that the policy should be changed, but until it does, this is (unfortunately) a losing battle. "It is not your responsibility or your right to decide who or what is worthy of an article, assuming that article is factually accurate." -- in fact this is indeed one of the responsibilities of wikipedia readers.Well you are just Mrs. Negative Nancy.ANTI-FCP!!! Link to post Share on other sites
timwakefield 68 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Pretty sure you guys have been severely leveled here.Oh I'm well aware that it might not be him on the account, but I think he said in his comments on the Zach article that he was aware of this thread, and thus might still be reading it.I'd lay 2-1 that it's not him, meaning I think there's at least a 1 in 3 chance that it is him. Link to post Share on other sites
TwstdWrstr 10 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Link to post Share on other sites
GetSprung 0 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 I don't mean to come off as the "bad cop" but someone brought this to my attention and asked me to check it out. I am beginning to think that it may have been someone that Zach reprimanded at some time and this is their way of getting back at him. I hate that I have been drug in the middle of this feud.Drugs are bad mmkay. Maybe I should report this to your supervisor? Hmmm? Link to post Share on other sites
Djsasso 0 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Drugs are bad mmkay. Maybe I should report this to your supervisor? Hmmm?Report away. My wife might be a little upset. As I have said before I do not work for Wikipedia. I am only a contributor. I realize I seem like the bed guy right now, but I hope this is not how you treat all of your new members. Link to post Share on other sites
FARGOpokerND 22 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Report away. My wife might be a little upset. As I have said before I do not work for Wikipedia. I am only a contributor. I realize I seem like the bed guy right now, but I hope this is not how you treat all of your new members.Serta or Sealy??? Link to post Share on other sites
TwstdWrstr 10 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 bed guy treat your members.You slut Link to post Share on other sites
Djsasso 0 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Serta or Sealy???Ah ha! Even I am not perfect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serta_(company)I have actually had to edit this article before. Link to post Share on other sites
timwakefield 68 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 "It is not your responsibility or your right to decide who or what is worthy of an article, assuming that article is factually accurate." -- this is indeed one of the responsibilities of wikipedia readers.Fair enough, but there are hundreds (thousands?) of articles on much much less interesting or notable people, events, or whatevers than Zach. I personally find it ridiculous that every date, number, etc etc links to a page. E.g. "Bill Clinton served two (insert link to page about the number two) terms..." Or, "On November 13, 2008 (insert one link to November 13, telling about other events in past years that happened on that day, coupled with a link to 2008, telling about the year...and notably omitting a link to November 13, 2008). Link to post Share on other sites
Suited_Up 2 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Report away. My wife might be a little upset. As I have said before I do not work for Wikipedia. I am only a contributor. I realize I seem like the bed guy right now, but I hope this is not how you treat all of your new members. http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...howtopic=131158 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now