|
Zippy the Bummer posted:thanks for posting this, its one of those resources that is amazing and which i never would have thought to look for Yeah! When Wikipedia failed me by not having any info, I went to the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships for Hornet and then checked the damage claims against Lundstrom’s The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign. Funny thing is Wikipedia’s US Navy ship articles nearly always cite and crib extensively from DANFS. Similarly, Wikipedia surprisingly nearly always cites the National Register of Historic Places nomination for any US historic site Wiki article. Indeed, the Wiki article on Hornet references DANFS. However, it cribbed from DANFS in 2015 when even DANFS was short on information about the Buin-Faisa-Tonolai raid. The good news is the historians of the Naval History & Heritage Command have been improving the entries in DANFS for years and will continue to. We just can’t expect that their good work will naturally and quickly propagate to Wikipedia. You can also see Hornet’s action report in NARA’s catalog, https://catalog.archives.gov/id/134024763
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 23:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 22:04 |
|
|
Sometimes Wikipedia has oddly thorough articles about completely random ships. Want a detailed history of a sidewheel icebreaker from Philadelphia that served as a gunboat for a few months in 1898? Wikipedia has you covered.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2024 23:48
|
|
|
It usually comes down to organized groups that systematically improve articles (Australian historical figures feature often for the same reason). Then there are randos who maintain one artcle rabidly like the one above. Wikipedia is surprisingly dead outside of groups like these. US centric articles also suffer from having the largest net-going population that will chuck in little tidbits of stuff of spurious or negative value IMO.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 02:22
|
|
|
Everyone complains about Wikipedia, but no one actually does anything about it. (So instead of complaining about it, next time...)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 03:16
|
|
|
Quackles posted:Everyone complains about Wikipedia, but no one actually does anything about it. Nah. About 15 years ago, as a bored grad student with too much time on his hands, I decided to try to improve wikipedia articles on German history and historical firearms. I ended up getting into dumb arguments with neckbeards who were insisting that the source they had trumped my source because it was online and in English. And since they were level 8000 wikipedia grand duke super wizards or whatever they won and reverted my edits that were based on things like "established fact" and "published research." I don't particularly hate wikipedia, it's a useful resource. I've coached students on how to use it as a jumping off point for researching poo poo. I do the same thing myself. But it's very much a platform that privileges the sort of person who frantically googles information to win an online debate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 03:30
|
|
|
Read an interesting article a few years ago about a woman who fights an uphill battle to edit SS related articles to remove the white washing and inflated elite status/kill count narrative pushed by chuds. She was very outnumbered
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 13:34
|
|
|
Also, if you speak a foreign language or are good at squinting at what google translate outputs and figuring out what it means, check out non-English wikipedias. A lot of them have much better standards. I can read German so that's the one that I hit up, but I've heard good things about French too. The easiest way to get a feel is to go to a subject you know something about and check the references. Sometimes - usually people's names - it's as easy as swapping out the en in the address to de or fr or whatever, but it also helps if you know enough to search in the language. Knowing it's going to be Schlacht bei Warschau for Battle of Warsaw, poo poo like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 13:40
|
|
|
there's a button on the website and the app and the mobile website to switch to different language equivalents of same article, you don't need to guess
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 14:00
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:But it's very much a platform that privileges the sort of person who frantically googles information to win an online debate. If you want to call me out like that, you can just PM me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 14:18
|
|
|
bob dobbs is dead posted:there's a button on the website and the app and the mobile website to switch to different language equivalents of same article, you don't need to guess That button is also an excellent way to find the translation for specific technical terms, especially in this AI-garbage flooded age.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 14:27
|
|
|
lol somehow I've gone all these years never noticing that button.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 14:54
|
|
|
There's a whole thing about Wikipedia reportedly having a shrinking number of editors who have become increasingly insular so that it's harder for newer people to get in and make their edits stick. https://www.vice.com/en/article/7x47bb/wikipedia-editors-elite-diversity-foundation Which wouldn't exactly be as big of a problem if it weren't for the fact that the internet outside of Wikipedia has seemingly shrunk over time as social media sites took over and many independent websites have died off or gotten shunted from most search results.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 15:43
|
|
|
Wikipedia doesn't even show up in search results anymore unless google can't find anything to sell you
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 16:19
|
|
|
Quackles posted:Everyone complains about Wikipedia, but no one actually does anything about it. "This site has an issue, so you should dedicate something between 'most of your free time' to 'a full time job' to working on the site for free, and even then that might not be enough to defeat the entrenched boss-level editors" is not really a sensible response. Maybe someone could casually edit back when Wikipedia was new, but for years now you have to fight massively leveled-up editors who's hobby is keeping pages they like how they like them without regard to accuracy, and from what Cyrano4848 and Slothful Cobra are saying it's only gotten worse since I last seriously looked at it. If it was just a matter of writing a decent article and meeting an objective standard for sources I think a pretty good number of people would provide edits, but having to engage in what's essentially a PVP game won by grinding time at Wikipedia against no-lifers who's chosen obsession is editing Wikipedia is a big turn off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 21:12
|
|
|
Armacham posted:Wikipedia doesn't even show up in search results anymore unless google can't find anything to sell you Try some searches in an Incognito window, I'm seeing plenty of wiki results right up at the top.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 21:34
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:There's a whole thing about Wikipedia reportedly having a shrinking number of editors who have become increasingly insular so that it's harder for newer people to get in and make their edits stick. I assume Jeffrey is behind it, because in the long run people will come pay  because we will be what is left
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 22:16
|
|
|
Discord doesn't make money though. It's going to be just like Reddit, which just IPO'd, in ten years. All these companies do is burn through billions in VC funds trying to acquire market share before slowly collapsing. Corporations have successfully killed the internet, we just haven't heard the pulse cease yet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 22:28
|
|
|
discord increased revenues 40% year over year this past year, compared to reddit's worst-in-class ad monetization, so don't quite mistake the non-fuckup for the fuckup yet
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 22:30
|
|
|
I can't wait to go back to reference books.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 22:31
|
|
|
bob dobbs is dead posted:discord increased revenues 40% year over year this past year, compared to reddit's worst-in-class ad monetization, so don't quite mistake the non-fuckup for the fuckup yet Reddit is something like the 3rd most trafficked site on the internet and I think there IPO was only around 8 billion. Compare that to things like Facebook and other similar sites and it's pretty pathetic from a corporate greed standpoint. Now that they are public I expect it to get a lot shittier as they try and squeeze as much blood from the stone as possible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 22:47
|
|
|
Pantaloon Pontiff posted:"This site has an issue, so you should dedicate something between 'most of your free time' to 'a full time job' to working on the site for free, and even then that might not be enough to defeat the entrenched boss-level editors" is not really a sensible response. Maybe someone could casually edit back when Wikipedia was new, but for years now you have to fight massively leveled-up editors who's hobby is keeping pages they like how they like them without regard to accuracy, and from what Cyrano4848 and Slothful Cobra are saying it's only gotten worse since I last seriously looked at it. If it was just a matter of writing a decent article and meeting an objective standard for sources I think a pretty good number of people would provide edits, but having to engage in what's essentially a PVP game won by grinding time at Wikipedia against no-lifers who's chosen obsession is editing Wikipedia is a big turn off. well said it's absolutely pointless to try and edit away false information on wikipedia
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 22:57
|
|
|
Speaking of books, I've found a copy of Gerhard Ritter's "Sword and Scepter vol 3: The Tragedy of Statesmanship" which covers internal german political shenigans during WWI and it's a super super great read. Go check it out if it's in your local university library. It's big, thick and old, but boy does it go into lots of detail on the splendid government dysfunction in the german imperial state.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 23:07
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Speaking of books, I've found a copy of Gerhard Ritter's "Sword and Scepter vol 3: The Tragedy of Statesmanship" which covers internal german political shenigans during WWI and it's a super super great read. Go check it out if it's in your local university library. It's big, thick and old, but boy does it go into lots of detail on the splendid government dysfunction in the german imperial state. This selection has inspired me to introduce the word “tohubohu” to my vocabulary. Just think how often it will be useful. “No, don’t bring up tank destroyer doctrine,” I’ll say; “you’re going to turn this thread into a tohubohu.”
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2024 23:55
|
|
|
milhist thread: tohubohu
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 00:19
|
|
|
thatbastardken posted:milhist thread: tohubohu pusillanimous tohubohu, surely
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 00:24
|
|
|
yeah agreed
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 00:25
|
|
|
I always more into “harem skarem”.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 00:55
|
|
|
Just gonna leave Sob Sister Bethmann Hollweg out of the thread title??
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 01:18
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I always more into “harem skarem”.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 17:33
|
|
|
Nessus posted:This sounds like a racist bugs bunny cartoon set in the Middle East 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 17:38
|
|
|
I literally just picked a random other old-fashioned word for “chaotic”, but I’m okay with how this shook out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 17:45
|
|
|
Holy poo poo you all have to watch it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOd9OjbepuU 1) it's from 1939 and is an early version of what would become Bugs Bunny squaring off with an equally early proto-Fudd 2) it's completely un-racist. There's just no content there to be offensive, it's a hunter trying to kill a rabbit. 3) it's also a weird moment of history being a flat loving circle, because Fudd's origin story is apparently being furious about the rising cost of meat and screaming that "I'm a taxpayer, they can't do this to me!" The newspaper at the beginning also has the shocking headline of "butchers demand living wage." So, Elmer Fudd's origin story is basically being a pissed off ugly American consumer stereotype who throws a tantrum at prices going up because other people want a living wage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 18:18
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Holy poo poo you all have to watch it. No, that character is apparently unnamed. The first short where Elmer Fudd was officially called that was this one from 1938 (although he'd been in a few shorts before that already), but he looks and sounds and acts pretty different; about all he shares with his final design is being bald: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEgNsTRdsHk
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 19:29
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:1) it's from 1939... That was fun to watch, and relevant-to-this-thread note that if it was made 3 years later, he wouldn't be complaining about butcher prices, but about meat rationing since prices were fixed but ration cards were in place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 20:04
|
|
|
Ritter's book just keeps giving. Austria-Hungarian foreign minister Czernin has a Clever Idea to stop unrestricted submarine warfare from leading to war with the US in 1917:  You can probably guess the end of that "instantly re-" sentence.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 20:48
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Ritter's book just keeps giving. "-surfaced two American passenger liners so they could sink them again?"
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 21:11
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Ritter's book just keeps giving. Based on my knowledge of German institutions, they instantly refused.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 21:26
|
|
|
"-sponded no" was my guess, but "-fused" is more succinct.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 21:29
|
|
|
Rejected
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 22:04 |
|
|
-volted? -tched? -gretted allying with them? -alised that this man is a donkey? -tarded mentally by being connected to him?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2024 21:51
|
|
