home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.fan.tolkien      JR Tolkien masturbatory worship echo      70,346 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 70,105 of 70,346   
   Paul S Person to jcb@inf.ed.ac.uk   
   Re: Tolkien Censorship at Wikipedia   
   07 Feb 22 08:50:04   
   
   XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: psperson1@ix.netcom.invalid   
      
   On Sun, 6 Feb 2022 18:52:59 +0000 (UTC), Julian Bradfield   
    wrote:   
      
   >On 2022-02-06, Louis Epstein  wrote:   
   >>> In the furtherance of their pathetic "Must Not be Invented Here Syndrome"   
   >>> (obsessed with publishing only things regurgitated from elsewhere rather   
   >>> than anything of independent value),he refuses to allow simple observations   
   >   
   >If you don't understand why Wikipedia works as it does, perhaps you   
   >should just not care about it.   
   >   
   >The prohibition of primary research is of course irritating - I'm an   
   >expert on quite a lot of (genuine technical) things, but I still can't   
   >write on them other than by citing published work.   
   >However, it does have an obvious purpose: if something is stated on   
   >Wikipedia, you should be able to trace it to a reputable published   
   >source, not some random loony on the Internet.   
   >Those of who use Wikipidia professionally (I tell all my students that   
   >it's a very valuable resource) appreciate that it doesn't allow   
   >"primary research" - otherwise the articles on, say, NP-completeness   
   >or Goedel incompleteness would be full of stuff by crackpots claiming   
   >to have solved/refuted them.   
      
   That is all very well but, as Louis Epstein points out in his reply,   
   both the book and the film are public works, and comparing two public   
   works which millions of people have experienced is not a form of   
   crackpottery.   
      
   Not to mention the possibility that such comparisons have been   
   published. Or that anyone who has experienced both can point them out.   
      
   Which gets us to another of his points: take the prohibition to   
   extremes and stating "grass is green" would be prohibited because it   
   is "original research". Common knowledge is, well, /common/.   
      
   Note that I am interpreting his points through my own filters. He is   
   free to disavow my examples.   
   --   
   "I begin to envy Petronius."   
   "I have envied him long since."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca