• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Alan wake FYI

jonneymendoza said:
but i cant edit stuff on encyclopedias but i can on the wiki
Click to expand...

Danish TV tried to alter stuff, eg. they changed the birthdate of the host...4 minutes alter the bad info was corrected...you don't seem to know how wiki works?
 
Atech said:
Danish TV tried to alter stuff, eg. they changed the birthdate of the host...4 minutes alter the bad info was corrected...you don't seem to know how wiki works?
Click to expand...

i've changed things that are not too obvious and it has stayed put for a very long time
 
jonneymendoza said:
i've changed things that are not too obvious and it has stayed put for a very long time
Click to expand...

So you just admitted to vandalism of a site, funded by numerous peoples donations and maintained by large numbers of volunters?
 
Atech said:
So you just admitted to vandalism of a site, funded by numerous peoples donations and maintained by large numbers of volunters?
Click to expand...

how is it vandalism? not my fault i can access and edit stuff from the wiki without a login etc.

That is my poitn though. wiki can be edited by anyone. i could go on that alan wake wiki and post a random date of release for that game or say its comming out on the ps3
 
jonneymendoza said:
i've changed things that are not too obvious and it has stayed put for a very long time
Click to expand...

That's the only real type of vandalism that stays also. Any obvious vandalism is reverted in usually less than 5 minutes.

If a piece of data has a value of 496 and you change it to 495, there has to be much more effort in checking the accuracy of that, as opposed to "HAHA THIS SITE SUCKS!". The somewhat good news is that the less readily apparent vandalism is less satisfying to the random drive-by vandals wiki gets daily. The bad news is I've seen bots that are dedicated to the subtle vandalism I've described. It's really messed up to be honest to destroy such a good thing. Luckily most eyes have good intentions.

In the end, for precise data points, make sure to check additional sources. For more general information, wiki is perfect.
 
Be ready to cite your sources, or else both of those entries will get removed relatively quickly.
Click to expand...

Do you have a source on this?
Otherwise a moderator may have to remove your post...:confused:
 
People seem to forget that Stalker SoC was eventually labeled vaporware because it was supposed to come out in 2003. Four years later it came out, had decent sales and mostly favorable reviews.

Alan Wake still looks to be a good game with a great design team behind it. They might have changed some of the story or did some redesigning, resulting in further delays.
 
Anywayz wikipedia ain't really reliable coz you don;t know how much crap has been made up on it, thats why schools here and elseware don;t allow using wikipedia as your source to information when researching.
 
Matthew Kane said:
Anywayz wikipedia ain't really reliable coz you don;t know how much crap has been made up on it, thats why schools here and elseware don;t allow using wikipedia as your source to information when researching.
Click to expand...

exactly. its not reliable and like i said, anyone can edit and post false info easily
 
jonneymendoza said:
exactly. its not reliable and like i said, anyone can edit and post false info easily
Click to expand...

Can you place fake links to sources too? :rolleyes:

Or can you just run around, alter non essential data...and they whine "Wiki is not accurate"?

AGAIN:
Nature did a study that showed Wiki is no better or worse than normal brick books...you opinion is overruled be reality.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Nature? LOL!!

anyways look at the wiki of this very same game http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Wake

coming out on the ps3 now and has had that entry there since yesterday.

AGAIN: why do you think schools and university's recommend to NOT get info from wiki?
Click to expand...

You can discard research if you'd like, but it doesn't make a difference considering you're in no position to impact it. Your opinion is irrelevant. Data is what matters.

Schools and universities do not allow Wikipedia because it's too easy to get information from it. That and its admittedly not as well done as the original research it cites. Regardless, it doesn't really matter, as most people who aren't supposed to use Wikipedia still do, not for the content it displays, but for the sources it lists. :cool:
 
You say wikipedia is no more accurate than books because it can be edited. I say it's more accurate because it can be edited. A book is one persons take on the subject. Biased and inaccurate it may be. At least on wikipedia this can be corrected and updated as new information comes to light.
 
The guy at E3 just said "alan wake will see the light of day in spring of 2010".
 
For all you wikipedia loyalists:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/05/11/international/i090708D96.DTL&tsp=1

The sociology major's made-up quote — which he added to the Wikipedia page of Maurice Jarre hours after the French composer's death March 28 — flew straight on to dozens of U.S. blogs and newspaper Web sites in Britain, Australia and India.
Click to expand...

"I am 100 percent convinced that if I hadn't come forward, that quote would have gone down in history as something Maurice Jarre said, instead of something I made up," he said. "It would have become another example where, once anything is printed enough times in the media without challenge, it becomes fact."
Click to expand...

Now the guy doesn't think Wiki is to blame, but it's important to note the power of such a potentially unreliable tool in modern society.
 
The entire article is complementing Wikipedia and criticizing "journalists" who don't fact check. It says Wikipedia removed the entries three times within minutes to hours, but not fast enough for journalists to copy paste from it.

The only thing unreliable in this instance is journalists who don't do their job.
 
well i have kept on saying it. wiki is a unreliable source of info that can easily be edited. someone edited saying it was coming out on the ps3 and it stayed there for half a week. now imagine if some journalism or fan goes there and sees that info and reports and spreads the word that alan wake is not an exclusive game?


Again, why do you think universities says a big fat NO on wiki sources? because its inaccurate and easily edited to include false information.
 
jonneymendoza said:
well i have kept on saying it. wiki is a unreliable source of info that can easily be edited. someone edited saying it was coming out on the ps3 and it stayed there for half a week. now imagine if some journalism or fan goes there and sees that info and reports and spreads the word that alan wake is not an exclusive game?


Again, why do you think universities says a big fat NO on wiki sources? because its inaccurate and easily edited to include false information.
Click to expand...

Sorry, that's crap. That's the fault of the journalist for not verifying his sources - that is his job to do research. Wikipedia is an excellent resource and constantly rapidly corrected, edited, and added to by it's volunteers and global audience. Universities say no to Wikipedia because it infringes on their oldschool monopoly of scholarship and academic method which is increasingly outdated in this world.

Any mildly intelligent person should consult and thoroughly vet any source he comes across - if you fall for a false bit of information from Wikipedia, that is your own personal intellectual incompentence.
 
jonneymendoza said:
well i have kept on saying it. wiki is a unreliable source of info that can easily be edited. someone edited saying it was coming out on the ps3 and it stayed there for half a week. now imagine if some journalism or fan goes there and sees that info and reports and spreads the word that alan wake is not an exclusive game?


Again, why do you think universities says a big fat NO on wiki sources? because its inaccurate and easily edited to include false information.
Click to expand...

There you go, lying again. I checked that Playstation 3 entry. It was up for 5 hours before it was reverted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alan_Wake&diff=292449469&oldid=292408850
 
Spare-Flair said:
Sorry, that's crap. That's the fault of the journalist for not verifying his sources - that is his job to do research. Wikipedia is an excellent resource and constantly rapidly corrected, edited, and added to by it's volunteers and global audience. Universities say no to Wikipedia because it infringes on their oldschool monopoly of scholarship and academic method which is increasingly outdated in this world.

Any mildly intelligent person should consult and thoroughly vet any source he comes across - if you fall for a false bit of information from Wikipedia, that is your own personal intellectual incompentence.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Wikipedia is great; it's journalists who are the problem.

Wikipedia corrects it mistakes faster than most.
 
jonneymendoza said:
well i have kept on saying it. wiki is a unreliable source of info that can easily be edited. someone edited saying it was coming out on the ps3 and it stayed there for half a week. now imagine if some journalism or fan goes there and sees that info and reports and spreads the word that alan wake is not an exclusive game?


Again, why do you think universities says a big fat NO on wiki sources? because its inaccurate and easily edited to include false information.
Click to expand...

Please use same timescale as other Homo Sapiens...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top