do you start discussions around u redits on the articles complaining about the removal ofthe info
On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 12:45 PM Cameron Kaiser via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > You're right that "original research" doesn't go into Wikipedia. But > "major mainstream outlet" is not required. For example, the Electrologica > X1 article cites sources for its content, most of which are rather obscure > publications such as tech reports in the CWI archives. The point is that > it has to be published elsewhere. > > On the other hand, site policy has a long list of what publishers they'll > accept and not accept. Amateur and hobbyist postings to blogs, for > example, are > not accepted, even if it's verifiable or reproducible or otherwise high > quality. > > I admit to a bit of pique here: I don't even bother updating Wikipedia > articles > anymore because they'll always get reverted by someone with less of a life > than > me for any number of specious reasons. > > -- > ------------------------------------ personal: > http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ -- > Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * > ckai...@floodgap.com > -- Understanding is a three-edged sword. -- Babylon 5, "Deathwalker" > ---------- > >
