Consulting Wikipedia before posting to AskMe

May 27, 2005 1:50 PM

Matt, can you please add Wikipedia to the list of places to check on the AskMe post a question page? A number of times, I've noticed perfectly cromulent answers were in there. In fact, I bet Mefites can suggest at least a couple other "check here first" sources.
posted by Plutor to Feature Requests at 1:50 PM (25 comments total)

It't a bit of a slippery slope, isn't it? Fist Google, which is reasonable, then Wikipedia, then Google Answers, then About.com, then every other conceivable source on the internet before you DARE to force people to take 8 seconds to read your question on Askme.
posted by nyterrant at 2:01 PM on May 27, 2005

I can't tell if you are using cromulent in its actual made-up meaning or its ironic made-up meaning.
posted by birdsquared at 2:02 PM on May 27, 2005

nyterrant: agreed.
posted by nobody at 2:14 PM on May 27, 2005

I'm a bit confused by this. Shouldn't a google search turn up the relevant wikipedia page?
posted by mai at 2:24 PM on May 27, 2005

Ah. On examining your examples, I see the problem. I think checking google and wikipedia is a good standard. No reason it should devolve into an endless list.
posted by mai at 2:26 PM on May 27, 2005

It't a bit of a slippery slope, isn't it?

I don't think so. I think just some text reminding you to:

1) Check for past questions on Ask. Mefi
2) Consult Google and Wikipedia

are fine. You can still go ahead and post. It would just be a useful reminder, nothing more.
posted by vacapinta at 2:42 PM on May 27, 2005

I had no idea how I was going to phrase it, but birdsquared did much better.
posted by NinjaPirate at 2:43 PM on May 27, 2005

nyterrant writes "It't a bit of a slippery slope, isn't it? Fist Google, which is reasonable, then Wikipedia, then Google Answers, then About.com, then every other conceivable source on the internet before you DARE to force people to take 8 seconds to read your question on Askme."

Your freudian slip does not go unnoticed my friend...
posted by schyler523 at 3:05 PM on May 27, 2005

I'm always confused by people who say "you could have found that answer on Google."

Google doesn't offer any content, just links to other websites. And people may have no clue about the reliability of those websites.

Wikipedia is well thought of, generally, but I, myself, haven't had much experience with it and haven't come to trust/rely on it yet.

I do, however, have personal experience with the MeFi network, and I reserve the right to ask questions here which might be "answered" on 1) random web pages in the google index 2) wikipedia in particular

It would just be a useful reminder, nothing more.

Yeah, okay.
posted by scarabic at 6:42 PM on May 27, 2005

Plutor: you should have checked Wikipedia before posting this callout.

In 2003, Ask Metafilter...

Although a good number of the posted questions could be answered using Google and other web resources (e.g., Wikipedia), the community is decidedly tolerant and willing to post the most obvious of answers.

heheh
posted by mischief at 7:31 PM on May 27, 2005

see, the point isn't to get questions answered, the point is to generate MeTa threads in which to castigate the poster.
posted by quonsar at 7:35 PM on May 27, 2005

I'm always confused by people who say "you could have found that answer on Google."

Oh, come on. You're a smart guy. No way are you "always confused" by this. There are plenty of AskMe questions that pop up about things that are readily answered by 80% of the first page of hits on a query totally lacking any of that magical "google-fu" (grr). That used car question was one of them. If you're wondering about the transferability of warranties on cars, it takes no particular gift to be able to think up a query like "cars warranties transferability," and there's no reason to think that a couple of dozen hits all saying the same thing are somehow not credible. Of course, as a sentient adult, you would consider each site individually.

There's lots of grey area here, obviously, but all plutor's asking is that people put in a bit of effort before crowding good questions off the front page. I don't see anything wrong with listing as many as a half-dozen sources people should try -- it's a nudge, not a mandate.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 8:49 PM on May 27, 2005

anything that makes less questions for askme is good. too many fucking questions.
posted by puke & cry at 9:49 PM on May 27, 2005

As mischief pointed out, if we're accepting wikipedia as canonical, then we must be treating the phrase "Although a good number of the posted questions could be answered using Google and other web resources (e.g., Wikipedia), the community is decidedly tolerant and willing to post the most obvious of answers." as canonical, meaning that, ironically, the very fact that you should check Wikipedia indicates that you don't actually have to check Google or Wikipedia if you don't want to.
posted by Bugbread at 12:46 AM on May 28, 2005

I'm getting dizzy.
posted by taz at 1:00 AM on May 28, 2005

*fans taz, sends bugbread for smelling salts*
posted by languagehat at 9:43 AM on May 28, 2005

You may have missed out on a stellar career as a lawyer, bugbread.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 10:26 AM on May 28, 2005

I actually put that line into the wikipedia entry to confuse people after I saw this thread.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 10:54 AM on May 28, 2005

Actually it says "The site recommends that users check Google and the AskMe archives before posting a question, but some users have requested that users check Wikipedia as well [1]."
posted by grouse at 1:19 PM on May 28, 2005

Sure, it says that now.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 2:37 PM on May 28, 2005

too many fucking questions.

Well, it's not *that* tough to scroll down the archive page to where I left off the last time, but yeah, I agree that Matt's "keep the front page short to minimize the number of questions" thing isn't working. He's apparently got a solution in testing, but but why not just give us the ability to view more questions on the AskMe front page, just like the Mefi front page?

But if I had to choose, I kinda prefer taz's proposal from this Metachat thread to the whole "favorites" thing, which seems a bit overboard. I can bookmark "fave" questions already; what I'm missing is the ability to view a large number of the most recent questions in one pass.
posted by mediareport at 5:31 PM on May 28, 2005

I second the original motion. Please add Wikipedia to the list on the AskMe post-form page.
posted by nicwolff at 12:02 AM on May 29, 2005

Fist Google
I'll never get that image out of my head.

And I second mediareport's proposal of using taz's proposal.
posted by deborah at 8:51 AM on May 29, 2005

see, the point isn't to get questions answered, the point is to generate MeTa threads in which to castigate the poster.
Ssssh! Don't let all the secrets out!

*seconds deborah's seconding of taz's proposal.*

Fist Google.
posted by dg at 3:38 PM on May 29, 2005

posted by dhartung at 8:01 PM on May 29, 2005