theweaselking: (Default)
[personal profile] theweaselking
Apparently, Limbaugh not only does all his research on Wikipedia, but lies about it and doesn't know that a "June 31" date on a Wikipedia citation is probably not legitimate.

For bonus points: The false information was added immediately before Limbaugh checked, and then deleted after.... by the same person in both cases. To a very specific Wiki entry. So this was a deliberate, targeted, prank.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-09-24 12:43 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] unnamed525.livejournal.com
Too bad it won't sway any of his dittoheads.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-09-24 04:22 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] krinndnz.livejournal.com
I admire the finesse. The problem is the ROI: at the point, any new demonstration that Limbaugh is a terrible person for every value of "terrible" you can think of is unlikely to convince anyone who already thinks well of him.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-09-24 08:21 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ed-dirt.livejournal.com
Too bad his listeners won't ever hear about this.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-09-24 12:37 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] faeriemuriel.livejournal.com
See, months are not something I'm very good with for some reason--my coworkers make fun of me because I continuously have to count the months on my fingers when I need to write the date in their "proper" format. So the June 31st thing was hilarious once it got pointed out to me. Also, I had read a story like this earlier, but not with the fake citation mentioned. That's a good dang prank.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-09-24 12:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] spartonian.livejournal.com
I hope The Daily Show gets wind of this.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-09-24 01:56 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bemused-leftist.livejournal.com
So what does this tell us about Wikipedia?

(no subject)

Date: 2010-09-24 02:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
That Wikipedia is excellent for getting a broad summary and a list of places to go for actual research.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-09-24 03:56 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] publius1.livejournal.com
I generally say that it's good for established, dry stuff, and bad for fluctuating, current events stuff. I mean, yes, you can get hoaxed on a section about Charles X of France, but it's less likely that the pimply-nosed little borderline psychotics who think that giving false information is funny (I'm looking at YOU, [livejournal.com profile] montoya) are going to bother with that when J-Lo's page is there, flashing its tits at you.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-09-24 04:20 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] skwidly.livejournal.com
I wonder whether Pete has documentation of the judicial career of Dred Scott...

(no subject)

Date: 2010-09-24 04:36 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] publius1.livejournal.com
[livejournal.com profile] montoya, the first Wiki troll!
Edited Date: 2010-09-24 04:42 pm (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2010-09-24 11:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bemused-leftist.livejournal.com
If only all contributors of flaky items were sporting enough to use non-existent dates.

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Mar. 10th, 2026 04:51 am