BBC Home

Explore the BBC

h2g2
7th January 2010
Accessibility help
Text only

.

Conversation Forum


SEARCH h2g2
Edited Entries only
Search h2g2Advanced Search


New visitors: Create your membership
Returning members: Sign in
BBC Homepage
The Guide to Life, The Universe and Everything.

This is the Conversation Forum for Wikipedia
Contact Us


Like this page?
Send it to a friend!

 
Conversation list
<< How to measure Wikipedia's success.
Uncyclopedia >>

Wickerpedia.
Post: 1
Posted Jun 30, 2005 by Jordan
Sure, you've seen Wikipedia, but have you seen http://www.wickerpedia.org/?

Ok, it only has one article (on Wicker) and a main page with a bit of info, but I didn't find it any more boring or dry than the real thing ok

blacksheep

Reply 

No Previous PostNext Post
Click to Make a Complaint
The Parent Posting, to Which This is a Reply
An Older Reply to the Parent PostingThis PostingA Newer Reply to the Parent Posting
The First Reply to This Posting

Wickerpedia.
Post: 2
Posted Jun 30, 2005 by Gnomon
biggrin

Reply 

Previous PostNext Post
Click to Make a Complaint
The Parent Posting, to Which This is a Reply
An Older Reply to the Parent PostingThis PostingA Newer Reply to the Parent Posting
The First Reply to This Posting

Wickerpedia.
Post: 3
Posted Aug 31, 2005 by Lucinda (et al) - Dun Researchin'
A friend sent me the link - made me smile.

The dryness of Wikipedia is like an art form. We take the source material, and remove opinion, and remove stuff that is suggestive of opinion, and think long and hard about whether using "The Prophet Muhammed" over "The prophet Muhammed" could be considered biased.

What you end up with, with most articles, is a very dense collection of facts, and the abundance of links just makes it feel even more tightly packed. Very dry, certainly. I like dry humour, and I like a dry encyclopedia. They share the same gloriously barren feeling.

Reply 

Previous PostNext Post
Click to Make a Complaint
The Parent Posting, to Which This is a Reply
An Older Reply to the Parent PostingThis PostingA Newer Reply to the Parent Posting
The First Reply to This Posting

Wickerpedia.
Post: 4
Posted Aug 31, 2005 by Jordan
Golly. I didn't realize dryness could be an art form. I consider it just boring.

I only use wikipedia for quick dates and basic facts that slip my mind. Otherwise, I do believe my brain would drip out my ear.

blacksheep

Reply 

Previous PostNext Post
Click to Make a Complaint
The Parent Posting, to Which This is a Reply
An Older Reply to the Parent PostingThis PostingA Newer Reply to the Parent Posting
The First Reply to This Posting

Wickerpedia.
Post: 5
Posted Apr 26, 2006 by Lucinda (et al) - Dun Researchin'
Art is of course subjective. Modern art anyway. I am reminded of those paintings full of just a single colour. Empty of... everything, and yet when the first ones were made, they had something new to say about the nature of art and artistry. They say little interesting now, simply because the thing they said then so quickly entered the popular discourse.

Wikipedia is an artwork, in that it is so full and yet so empty. It is an artwork of extremes, an artwork showing what is possible. In a way, it parallels MetaBaby, which is an artwork showing what is impossible.

Reply 

Previous PostNext Post
Click to Make a Complaint
The Parent Posting, to Which This is a Reply
An Older Reply to the Parent PostingThis PostingA Newer Reply to the Parent Posting
The First Reply to This Posting

Wickerpedia.
Post: 6
Posted Apr 26, 2006 by Gnomon
An interesting comment from someone who left h2g2 for Wikipedia. Do you still hang out over there, Lucinda?

Reply 

Previous PostNext Post
Click to Make a Complaint
The Parent Posting, to Which This is a Reply
An Older Reply to the Parent PostingThis PostingA Newer Reply to the Parent Posting
The First Reply to This Posting

Wickerpedia.
Post: 7
Posted Apr 26, 2006 by Lucinda (et al) - Dun Researchin'
About as much as I hang out here. It is an interesting thing, to come back to a place I've left, to be a wandering ghost over my old haunts, some still left as they were, untouched and dusty, whilst others are barely recognisable. It makes me philosophical, and given to saying shallow things in a deep way.

Dancing came after wikipedia. Nowadays, I'm more likely to be slaying virtual dragons. I don't know what next. Dancing still appeals - I may go back to that.

It is an odd thing, having a past.

Reply 

Previous PostNo Next Post
Click to Make a Complaint
The Parent Posting, to Which This is a Reply
An Older Reply to the Parent PostingThis PostingA Newer Reply to the Parent Posting
The First Reply to This Posting

Key
Navigation Example
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
Click to Make a Complaint
 Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting
Conversation list
<< How to measure Wikipedia's success.
Uncyclopedia >>






Disclaimer

Most of the content on h2g2 is created by h2g2's Researchers, who are members of the public. The views expressed are theirs and unless specifically stated are not those of the BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of any external sites referenced. In the event that you consider anything on this page to be in breach of the site's House Rules, please click here. For any other comments, please click on the Feedback button above.




About the BBC | Help | Terms of Use | Privacy & Cookies Policy