Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 22nd Jan 2007 23:27 UTC, submitted by anonymous
Permalink for comment 204803
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-01-22
I don't see it as unethical. I see it as yet another example of why wikipedia shouldn't be automatically trusted as a source of information. It's a dump-not an encyclopedia. Sometimes it gets cleaned and then messed up again.
I think the dmoz.org model would make more sense. Want to submit a change? Pass it through a volunteer editor(s) first and they will write it up.