tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13679122.post113166329192605291..comments2024-02-23T03:49:25.037-05:00Comments on Wikipedia Blog: Ben Yateshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11551938089613651798noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13679122.post-1131703996054383562005-11-11T05:13:00.000-05:002005-11-11T05:13:00.000-05:00I'm not sure I'd entirely agree with taht. It dep...I'm not sure I'd entirely agree with taht. It depends on the controversy -- some controversial articles are in fact pretty good. The worst articles tend to be ones on <I>minor</I> controversies. They don't get much attention, so the editors that are good at writing/coding mutually agreeable text never find them and slanted info remains in place.<BR/><BR/>Another advantage of high-profile controversies is that most readers are familiar enough with the subject to ferret out the bias and take only the accurate-seeming stuff.Ben Yateshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11551938089613651798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13679122.post-1131676632480159432005-11-10T21:37:00.000-05:002005-11-10T21:37:00.000-05:00It would be intresting to see how articles with hi...It would be intresting to see how articles with highly *contraversial* content get rated. <BR/><BR/>In my experiance, contraversial articles get filled with a bunch of useless crap.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com