Comments on: wikipedia considered harmful

by: ig

Thu, 12 Apr 2007 12:39:44 +0000

You said it! The traditional results of a Google search included a dozen writeups about the topic at hand. Nowadays the first result is always Wikipedia and you have a dozen people fighting over what Wikipedia says about a topic. It’s the worst of the web combined with the worst of search all jammed into one site. And it’s usually not reliable information.

It was once suggested that if you were to put a million monkeys in front of a million typewriters, they would eventually reproduce all of the works of mankind. Well, we can now say that it’s been tried, and lemme tellya — Wikipedia ain’t Shakespeare.

Thanks for an insightful article.

— Art C., UNCENSORED! BBS http://uncensored.citadel.org

by: Janne

Thu, 25 Jan 2007 17:12:19 +0000

You do know, don’t you, that you can filter out wikipedia.org like this: “bottom quark -site:wikipedia.org”?

by: Richard

Mon, 04 Dec 2006 20:27:23 +0000

Is the Wikipedia search engine that bad?

Perhaps you should hit Google and use: site:wikipedia.org paris hilton. Then we can reserve the normal Google search to search the rest of the ‘net.

by: razorhead

Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:02:46 +0000

Whereas, these days, I increasingly look to google to pull the relevant wikipedia pages out for me, especially when looking up something random that I may or may not be interested in.