×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Spanish TV Channels Vandalize Wikipedia

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the setting-fire-to-a-house-to-see-how-quickly-the-firemen-arrive dept.

Television 182

strider2004 writes to tell us that Barrapunto, a Spanish tech news site, has outed two TV stations in Spain, one public and the other private, for engaging in Wikipedia vandalism for the sake of a story. (The link is in Spanish; Google translation here.) The public station introduced falsehoods into the Wikipedia entry for John Lennon; the private one vandalized the Elvis Presley entry. Both stations said they were performing an "experiment" to check the reaction time of Wikipedia. Both articles were promptly corrected by other editors.
Update: 08/19 13:01 GMT by KD : Barrapunto is not affiliated with Slashdot.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

182 comments

Good Ol' Unreliable WikipediaBS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20282391)

Anyone can change it without anything to back it, generally changed by the whiny commie demoncrat terrorists to spread their communist lies. If someone crashes WikipediaBS I would not at all be unhappy. Hell, those demoncrats deserve it.

Re:Good Ol' Unreliable WikipediaBS (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20282417)

Anyone can change it without anything to back it,{{citation-needed}} generally changed by the whiny commie demoncrat terrorists to spread their communist lies.{{citation-needed}}

Re:Good Ol' Unreliable WikipediaBS (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20284975)

Simple demoncrat, look at who cites WikipediaBS as a source. Oh, it is you whiny commie demoncrat terrorists that love Communist Linsux and Open-Sores. It is only you demoncrats that are allowed to change it to suit your agenda in turning America into yet another failed socialist experiment.

Re:Good Ol' Unreliable WikipediaBS (0)

buswolley (591500) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282419)

Wait. How can you vandalize something on Wikipedia? Its a Wiki, and free speech..even if it gets edited out.

Re:Good Ol' Unreliable WikipediaBS (4, Insightful)

InfiniteWisdom (530090) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282843)

Just because it's a medium that allows anyone to edit stuff, it doesn't mean adding bogus information isn't vandalism. That's like spraying painting graffiti on a wall isn't vandalism because paint sticks to the wall.

Re:Good Ol' Unreliable WikipediaBS (1)

jaymzter (452402) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283477)

It seemed to be ok when the the Daily Show did it.

Re:Good Ol' Unreliable WikipediaBS (3, Insightful)

ta bu shi da yu (687699) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283631)

Then perceptions != reality. It was never OK.

Re:Good Ol' Unreliable WikipediaBS (1, Flamebait)

fyngyrz (762201) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284181)

If these stations insist that such experiments are ok, perhaps someone should suggest to them that hammering a spike through the transmission line of their tower might be just as reasonable. You know, just to check their reaction time. After all, after the fuses and output devices are replaced, it'll be as good as new, eh? :-/

Re:Good Ol' Unreliable WikipediaBS (2, Informative)

Gerzel (240421) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284657)

You know they actually did ban Steven Colbert for that and they tend to pre-emptily lock things that are brought up on the show for changing.

Re:Good Ol' Unreliable WikipediaBS (1)

Mr. Freeman (933986) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283899)

That analogy made exactly zero sense.
A wiki is an online medium that contains information that anyone can edit. A wall is a surface people are generally not supposed to write on regardless of the correctness of the information. I don't have any idea how spray paint got into this, spray paint is permanent, editing text is not.

Re:Good Ol' Unreliable WikipediaBS (2, Interesting)

ultranova (717540) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284897)

A wiki is an online medium that contains information that anyone can edit. A wall is a surface people are generally not supposed to write on regardless of the correctness of the information.

Wikipedia is an online dictionary. People aren't generally supposed to edit it to contain outright lies on purpose. They can do so, but then again, they can write on walls.

I don't have any idea how spray paint got into this, spray paint is permanent, editing text is not.

Really ? I must look into it the next time my house needs repainting. And maybe NASA should just forget heat tiles and coat the Space Shuttle with this indestructible material. Not to mention that if you spraypaint your clothes, they become bulletproof - an essential feature in Iraq and American large cities.

Lost in Translation (1)

jimbug (1119529) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282403)

In order to give but interest to the news they have described to wikipedia of "free encyclopedia, so free that anyone can alter it", and an amiable "expert" has illustrated to the viewers with a practical example on the easy thing that she is to vandalizar it.
What an entertaining but hard to read translation. Can we get someone who actually speaks spanish to type up a translation for us?

Local FOX News translation (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20282505)

WIKIPEDIA... A free encyclopedia, so free ANYONE can edit it. Are child molesters using it to reach out to YOUR CHILDREN? The answer... coming up later this hour.

Re:Local FOX News translation (1)

game kid (805301) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283811)

I'd have watched it, but it was after 11:00 PM and I still didn't know where my citations were.

I'm not too worried though; I hear NBC is showing To Revert an Editor later this week.

Re:Lost in Translation (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20283071)

In order to add some salt and pepper to a boring story (read: to increase tv share), they described Wikipedia as "a free encyclopedia, so much free that you can freely alter it at will", and then a so-called "expert" (read: a girl who had no idea about how this whole thing works, but oh-oh, she's just sooo cute!) happily showed everybody how to vandalize an article. She demonstrated how easy it was by introducing some odd junk in Lennon's article regarding Spanish "paella". However, she added it was "easy" to get that fixed.

All in all, why's this crap even getting any attention? They're stupid, ok, so what? Come on...

Red neck response (-1, Offtopic)

buswolley (591500) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282409)

for all the idiots: Mexico != Spain

Re:Red neck response (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20282471)

Then why do they speak Mexican in Spain?

Re:Red neck response (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20282477)

for all the idiots: Mexico != Spain

It is for sufficiently large values of Mexico.

Re:Red neck response (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20282775)

Are you sure that you are not accidentally implicitly casting the values in your enums (NorthAmerica and Europe) to ints?

And the number of elephants in Spain (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20282435)

Has tripled in the last year.

So.... (4, Insightful)

grassy_knoll (412409) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282481)

Goofballs add bogus info to Wikipedia; said bogus info is promptly corrected.

This is news?

Re:So.... (1)

jimbug (1119529) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282537)

Lindsay Lohan prefiere su vida en la selva a la de un instituto de Chicago en "Chicas Malas"
I think we all know that's the real news.

Re:So.... (3, Funny)

cerberusss (660701) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283717)

Goofballs add bogus info to Wikipedia; said bogus info is promptly corrected. This is news?
You're *so* right. In 2048, when IPv4 addresses run out and Wikipedia becomes sentient, we'll all have a laugh about it.

Wait ..... (0)

Robotron23 (832528) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282523)

Hold the phone here...

"(Spanish Slashdot) has outed two TV stations in Spain..."

How on Earth can two television stations be of homosexual leanings? Also since when was the Spanish Slashdot site an authority on these things? Guess those Spanish speaking nerds just know something we all don't...:)

Re:Wait ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20282831)

It is at least fortunate that two stations were outed.

Re:Wait ..... (5, Funny)

BinBoy (164798) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282901)

How on Earth can two television stations be of homosexual leanings?

Vandalizing wikipedia is gay.

Re:Wait ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20284415)

How on Earth can two television stations be of homosexual leanings?

Vandalizing wikipedia is gay.


I for one welcome our new homosexual overlords.

Re:Wait ..... (-1, Troll)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284465)

Vandalizing wikipedia is gay.
Actually, being a wikipedia hall monitor (or editor, or whatever those jumped up twats with fake degrees call themselves) is they gayest thing ever.

Accurizer [wikipedia.org] is the gayest of the lot, so gay he's got two assholes.

Re:Wait ..... (1)

UbuntuDupe (970646) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283261)

Well, from what I understand, people in Spain speak Spanish with a lithp. Hope that helps.

Re:Wait ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20283411)

But does lithp understand Spanish? Does it answer back?

Re:Wait ..... (1, Offtopic)

Quino (613400) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283649)

in case anyone cares:

If you're taught Spanish in the US, you're likely taught Mexican (or Latin American -- not actually sure as some South American Spanish sounds a lot like Spanish -er Spanish to me) pronunciation.

One of the biggest differences is that the letters 'c' and 'z' don't sound like the 's' in Spain though they do in Mexico; Spaniards pronounce them like the English "th". For instance, the Spanish word for shoe is "zapato".

a Mexican person pronounces it sort of like: "saw-paw-toe"
a Spanish person pronounces it sort of like: "thaw-paw-toe"

Both pronounce "santa" as we would with the normal English 's' sound.

Not sure if that means that Spaniards (or maybe other Latin Americans) speak with a lisp :) though I can see why a Mexican person (for instance) might describe it that way, though it only applies to those two letters.

Incidentally, though it is an interesting (IMHO) question posed by the Spanish TV networks (how well and how quickly, if at all, does the self-correcting mechanism on Wikipedia work), there seems to be understandable condemnation on Barrapunto for basically defacing the website to test it out, along with suggestions on how they could have done things better, references to Stephen Colbert, etc.

Hey, it IS just like Slashdot, but in Spanish! :)

Admittedly I didn't see anything about Cowboy Neal, goatse.cx, hot grits, complaints about a "lefty/liberal bias", Stephen King's death, posts interchanging "your" with "you're" or posts about woman-on-dog action -- though I did try browsing at -1 :)

Re:Wait ..... (1)

Neko-kun (750955) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283775)

This maybe regarded as off-topic since it may have been covered before, but I'd like to add to your post with the fact that Argentinians tend to also sound like Spaniards and that unless you've been exposed to, i.e. lived in places like L.A. and had the interactions in spanish with the spanish speaking folk, you won't understand the usage of the idioms spoken by another dialect.
Neither do ways of saying nor sayings have any easy interchange between the dialects...

Best example would be the comparison of American and British english but extended to 21 different, if you're not counting the US' three different amalgamations of the dialects, variations :P

Another Brick In The Wall (3, Insightful)

Vampyre_Dark (630787) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282613)

You open what is supposed to be all the world's knowledge combined in a site, except that the policy is to treat it like a public bathroom. That's fine, but why is it news every time someone gets caught taking a shit in it?

It's fine to let people contribute, but most articles need to be locked down when they are completed, and then you submit stuff to be added for peer review or something. There is no reason why 8 year old Johnny needs to be editing the live version of a page on something he knows nothing about.

Is there enough new information on Elvis arriving, that his page needs to be open to live submissions from anyone 24/7/365?

Re:Another Brick In The Wall (1)

Solra Bizna (716281) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282747)

Is there enough new information on Elvis arriving, that his page needs to be open to live submissions from anyone 24/7/365?

There will be as soon as I catch up to his spaceship!

-:sigma.SB

disclaimer: this post contains facetiousness, which is known by the state of California to cause miscarriages in lab giraffes.

Re:Another Brick In The Wall (5, Insightful)

abhi_beckert (785219) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283025)

The problem is if 8 year old Johnny can't edit the page, he won't bother. Anyone can fix a typo, but if it's too much work they won't do it.

The openness is the reason wikipedia succeeded. Not because being open gives better content, but because being open gives more content, and more content makes it valuable to more people, and being valuable to more people gives them more editors, and more editors usually gives better content.

Also, you're forgetting: any page with regular vandalism does get locked down.

Re:Another Brick In The Wall (1)

Vampyre_Dark (630787) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283669)

I'm not forgetting anything. I realize that any page gets locked down after repeated vandalism. But one being page being vandalized a lot, and several pages getting vandalized should be treated the same way. I also don't argue with your open case.

I think the default browsing mode of wikipedia for casual users should be pages that are known to be safe and factual. For those that want it, have the working copy that can be promoted to the default page when it's time.

Re:Another Brick In The Wall (3, Insightful)

init100 (915886) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284283)

It's fine to let people contribute, but most articles need to be locked down when they are completed

How would you define completed? Very few articles can claim to contain every piece of knowledge about the subject. There is always room for more, so locking down anything permanently would be a horribly bad idea.

Re:Another Brick In The Wall (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20284389)

I'm unclear if you're comparing the text of wikipedia to shit in the toilet, or the stuff that people have etched into the paint on the wall. If it's the former, then I guess wikipedia is of no value at all. If it's the latter, and young Johnny is smearing his own shit on the wall over the otherwise worthwhile etchings, then it seems like the problem is Johnny, and not the rest of the world.

Need Disclaimer (-1, Offtopic)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282731)

I think it's time Wikipedia put up clear disclaimers about the nature of the content to avoid a big-ass lawsuit. Remember, this is a country where an organization has to put "Do Not Eat" on Preparation-H tubes or risk being sued up the wazoo (in both a pun and non-pun sense).
       

Re:Need Disclaimer (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20282867)

You mean like this [wikipedia.org] which is linked at the bottom of every single page?

Re:Need Disclaimer (5, Informative)

xaosflux (917784) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283035)

The bottom of each page links to Wikipedia'a:

General Disclaimer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_dis claimer/ [wikipedia.org]

Which links to the specific disclaimers:

Risk disclaimer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Risk_discla imer/ [wikipedia.org]

Medical disclaimer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Medical_dis claimer/ [wikipedia.org]

Legal disclaimer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Legal_discl aimer/ [wikipedia.org]

and

Content disclaimer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Content_dis claimer/ [wikipedia.org]

I'm shocked! (5, Funny)

Manchot (847225) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282735)

I can't believe this is true! Why did no one tell me that Slashdot has a Spanish version? Seriously, looking at it is like looking at Bizarro Slashdot.

Re:I'm shocked! (5, Funny)

Tatisimo (1061320) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282769)

That's no Slashdot! It has no CowboyNeal option on its polls!

Re:I'm shocked! (5, Funny)

niktemadur (793971) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283761)

That's no Slashdot! It has no CowboyNeal option on its polls!

Not to mention the usual witty commentary we've all come to know and love, time and again, but in spanish:

- Imagínate un enjambre Beowulf de estos!
- Esa no es una luna, es una estación espacial!
- En Rusia Soviética, Wikipedia te vandaliza a TI!

Re:I'm shocked! (1)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284203)

``- Esa no es una luna, es una estación espacial!''

Hmm, I didn't know that one.

PS. I just want you all to know how great it feels being back on a proper *nix.

Me Spanish DotSlash Number 1 Fan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20283109)

Me Spanish DotSlash Number 1 Fan

Re:I'm shocked! (1)

hmccabe (465882) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283287)

I'd hoped Spanish Slashdot was 4 hours long, and intercut with dance numbers, singing and astonishingly hot models.

Re:I'm shocked! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20284977)

That's Slashdot India.

Re:I'm shocked! (4, Funny)

mjsottile77 (867906) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283329)

I dunno about that. It's not really authentic Spanish Slashdot until their poll has an option involving "VaqueroNeal".

The experiment was already done before (4, Informative)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 6 years ago | (#20282933)

In case nobody remembers, Stephen Colbert's "experiment" proved the response time for fixing BS entries in wikipedia (that librarians are hiding something) in about 15 seconds. Why do they have to try the experiment otra ves? :P

Re:The experiment was already done before (5, Insightful)

belmolis (702863) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283051)

Maybe the Colbert Report is not on Spanish TV?

Re:The experiment was already done before (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20283131)

It is but its called Colbero & his many camels

Fair's fair (5, Interesting)

cabalamat3 (1089523) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283043)

I think someone should write graffiti on big letters on the walls of these TV stations... purely as an experiment, you understand, to see how long it takes to remove it.

Mod Parent Up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20284177)

Someone mod parent up, +5 inspired.

Re:Fair's fair (1)

nacturation (646836) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284627)

The equivalent would be to graffiti a wall using a few Post-It notes as those are easy to remove.
 

Re:Fair's fair (2)

cabalamat3 (1089523) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284731)

Yes, you're right. What I was really getting at is the arrongance and selfishness of those who think it is OK for them to vandalise other people's stuff for their silly and pathetic TV programmes.

Investigative journalism vs. vandalism (1)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284777)

That's a reasonable argument, but I think you're missing the fact that correcting entries is part and parcel of what wikipedia is all about. I applaud people for testing that system. If we had more journalists who actually investigated things, maybe the media wouldn't have let the voting system become compromised, and wouldn't have let thousands of people die in iraq without mentioning it much.

Vandalising a wall with something relatively permanent is a different issue to this kind of investigation, though. A closer analogy would be something like calling a news station and reporting a false news item, or setting up a fake corruption incident, to see whether the media catches it. Sadly, they're more likely to add weight to such things these days, given how they just repeat press releases word for word most of the time.

Terrorists place bombs in Spanish TV offices (4, Funny)

MarkByers (770551) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283163)

"We were just testing to see how fast the emergency services would react..."

barrapunto - not just for nerds (5, Funny)

boguslinks (1117203) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283275)

Their slogan is not "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters", but "La informacion que te interesa"...

What does that make them, the spanish Drudge Report?

Re:barrapunto - not just for nerds (2, Funny)

UserGoogol (623581) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283429)

Well, their top story is that Netbeans is switching to the GPLv2, whereas Daily Drudge's top story is that HISTORIC HELL STORM SET FOR JAMAICA.

Re:barrapunto - not just for nerds (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284637)

Well, their top story is that Netbeans is switching to the GPLv2, whereas Daily Drudge's top story is that HISTORIC HELL STORM SET FOR JAMAICA.
What's the "hell storm set"? A historic supercomputer? And what does Jamaica plan to do with it? :-)

Re:barrapunto - not just for nerds (4, Interesting)

Flipao (903929) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284253)

There's no proper translation for terms like "nerd" or "geek" in spanish, so the only slogan that'd make sense would be "News for people who're good with computers, but socially inept", which doesn't quite have the same ring to it. As a proper nerd, I of course learned english just so I could read the original version of Slashdot. :P

Response times depend on the article (3, Interesting)

JimboFBX (1097277) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283549)

Other "experiments" kept from us:

Response time for vandalizing Sonic Hedgehog [wikipedia.org] - 8 days
Response time for vandalizing Sonic the Hedgehog [wikipedia.org] - 8 seconds

Re:Response times depend on the article (1)

Arimus (198136) | more than 6 years ago | (#20283885)

Not really.

Sonic the hedgehog is an article a lot of people have enough info about to be able to pull it back into shape. On the other hand SHH isn't.

Response time will depend on the depth of knowledge required to maintain an article, some are simple, some are still within the knowledge domain of the wider community who are interested in that field and some can only be edited by experts in their field. SHH being a good example of the latter.

(Assuming the vandalism wasn't just sticking a very obvious bit of text in, in which case edit times will be linked to frequency that page)

Re:Response times depend on the NEED (1)

TechnicolourSquirrel (1092811) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284073)

I think the reason for the difference in response time to vandalism has not much to do with the expertise required (after all, most vandalism is not written with expertise and thus is plainly obvious to anyone), but rather with the overall traffic to the article, which influences the likely that it will be vandalised in the first place, which influences the number of editors who have acquired, in reaction, the habit of 'standing by' for reversions. In other words, highly vandalised articles naturally acquire several guardian angels, who have become habituated to responding in seconds. Rarely vandalised articles have to wait for one of the editors to make a routine check. Notice that this relationship between vandalism frequency and response time means that there may not much be difference in statistical reliability between a low response time article and a high response time article.

who knew? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20283585)

So in what other languages is there a /.?

Is there a "Schragstrichpunkt"?

or a "puntinoditaglio" ?

or perhaps even a "schuinestreeppunt"?

Re:who knew? (2)

RAMMS+EIN (578166) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284237)

``or perhaps even a "schuinestreeppunt"?''

Exists, but is actually tweakers.net [tweakers.net].

And, IMO, nowhere near as good as Slashdot.

Re:who knew? (1)

pimpimpim (811140) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284871)

And for the Germans there is heise.de [heise.de]. The biggest disadvantage tweakers and heise have is their commenting system. Comments are already with respect to the layout of minor importance to the article. Then Heise has a nasty thread/reply browsing system which doesn't help a fast reading of the comments one bit. Tweakers has a more simple system, but the different layers of moderation are not as nicely arranged. And of course size of the user base limit is a point, as tweakers and heise will not have anyone who can speak English reading it, whereas many germans and dutch people do read slashdot.

I must say that I think Barropunto is a pretty cool name for anything, would very well fit a sporty Seat for example.

Re:who knew? (1)

MoriaOrc (822758) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284801)

I think this one was in a story some time ago (or I found it some other way maybe...):
http://slashdot.jp/ [slashdot.jp]

Even closer to the original then Barrapunto (Color scheme and icons). But no, that pole doesn't have a "kaubooi niiru" option on it, either (Slashdot won't let me post this in Katakana :/)

Re:who knew? (1)

MoriaOrc (822758) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284891)

(Bad form to reply to myself...)
Forgot to mention, for those interested, the tag line is:
"Arege na nyuusu to zatsudan saito"

Which means
"Arege* News and Idle Chat site."

*Arege seems to be something they made up themselves. It's spelled in Katakana (the alphabet used for foreign words, spelled close-to phonetically) and used as an adjective. At first I thought it meant "Aggregate" but some after looking at some sites that popped up in google [google.com] I don't think that's the case any more. It might be some sort of attempt at translating the "News for Nerds" part of (original) slashdot's tag line.

It's like slashdot, but in orange.. and in Spanish (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20284079)

On Barripunto is "Cowboy Neal" known as "El Gringo Neal"?

Is there also a pink version of slashdot? Maybe one with "News for men, stuff that lubricates" or "News for girls, ponies that are cuddly".

Re:It's like slashdot, but in orange.. and in Span (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20284379)

On Barripunto is "Cowboy Neal" known as "El Gringo Neal"?

No, but there is the stupid boy who thinks that every spanish speaking country does it with mexican accent.

That wikipedia outfit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20284081)

That wikipedia outfit is a FAG encyclopedia company. They are faggery daggery doo boys, yes sir.

Spanish Ads (3, Funny)

AngryJim (1045256) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284117)

clicking on the Barrapunto link, I get an advertisement for something called "Dorkbot Madrid"

I think it's the first time an advertisement has ever made me want to buy something, particularly when I have no clue what it is.

Re:Spanish Ads (1)

faragon (789704) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284533)

There is also an Ad for banning OpenXML as ISO standard. [openxml.info]
(I agree with its arguments)

In the end, most users at Barrapunto [barrapunto.com] are also usual suspects^W./'ers [slashdot.org] (the spanish side it is interesting as it is focused on local events, politics, it's written in spanish -the english is still a handicap for many here in Spain- etc.; although, it has to be noted that Barrapunto is tiny in comparison to Slashdot, as the second has a huge community -receives worldwide contributions-).

A recurrent motto, as a joke, is "Barrapunto no es lo que era" ("Barrapunto is not what it was used to be").

Why the outrage? (4, Insightful)

jparker (105202) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284429)

Most of the comments so far seem very upset that the TV channels did this, but it really doesn't seem like a big deal to me. Wikipedia is a community, a society like any other. It has its values, with accuracy being one of the most important, and someone did a social experiment to see how well that community adhered to its principles. Sure, it required being a little bit of a bad actor, but if Slashdot reported on a new study where researchers bumped into people while carrying several packages and found that Linux users were more likely to help them pick up their dropped items, I don't think the comments would be blasting them for assault.

This was minor public vandalism, of a kind the community sees every day, and a kind that it was built to correct. If they had launched a systematic campaign to spread disinformation throughout many articles, that would be a serious problem, but changing the date of Lennon's death to 2007 instead of 1977? If edits like that caused Wikipedia any kind of damage, it would have died years ago.

questions on vandalism aside (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284695)

They picked up two the most famous cultural icons in the world for their experiment. Supposedly, those pages should have been watched by "million eyes" (remember the open software motto?). Comparing that to the graffiti on the wall, which requires much more effort to fix, is plain vanilla exaggeration.

I guess the public ran of the steam of the Wikipedia anonymous fixing by corporate bastards, and now feels the need to pick on whatever left of the story. That is what exactly what traditional media does by beating the dead horse ad nausea. And now /.

Fast corrections is a bogus myth! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20284757)

I am unimpressed by the fanboys' constant claims of Wikipedia being corrected immediately. How about articles "guarded" by gonzo editors claiming ultimate knowledge, disregarding experts? Huh?

OK, how about Van Allen radiation belt [wikipedia.org] where fast editing has prevented corrections? Evidently the fanboys feel NASA is in the wrong, original research perhaps?? As this talk entry shows [wikipedia.org] a glaring mistake has been known for over a year but noone can do anything about it.

I am sick and tired of these stories claiming Wikipedia editors are that good. Rather I see these editors as the direct descendants of the mob that burned the Library of Alexandria.

In the name of science (5, Funny)

a9bejo (828492) | more than 6 years ago | (#20284835)

"Both stations said they were performing an "experiment" to check the reaction time of Wikipedia."

Maybe someone should perform an "experiment" to test the stability of that TV station's websites.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...