Notice: As of now I am no longer maintaining a watchlist of any kind. My old watchlist is preserved at /watchlist.
Please leave me a message by email, which I check every day and respond to regularly. If you do not wish to interact by email, then you may leave a message here. This page shows up in my related changes, which I check on a sporadic basis. I do not maintain a watchlist. I typically operate an alternate account Slawekb(talk·contribs·deleted contribs·logs·edit filter log·block user·block log) because my name is long and the diacritics are not always available. If you can help it though, please don't call me "Slawek" or "Slawekb". I prefer "Sławomir" (pronounced "Swav-o-meer"), although "Slawomir" (without the diacritic) is also acceptable. If you prefer a handle, "SB" is fine as well.
"Because experts are not given recognition on Wikipedia and indeed looked on as somewhat suspect, editors that are ignorant or outright cranks are afforded way too much power at this site... People who haven't taken a physics class in their life shouldn't be editing physics articles for content. When they habitually introduce errors into the encyclopedia they should be reverted as quickly as someone would revert petty vandalism."
"Those who are committed to accuracy are effectively encouraged to create tight-knit, ever-vigilant cabals to edit war against the ignorant. It is an intolerable nightmare, one that the community refuses to address for fear of becoming "elitist". But elitism is only a vice when it is unwarranted... Unless Wikipedia addresses this, devoted idiots will degrade the quality of the encyclopedia until quasars become laser stars, the Big Bang never happened, evolution is just a theory: not a fact, and the Parapsychological Association will be afforded the ability to demarcate between science and pseudoscience."
"Disgusting. The community needs to de-yellow their livers and ban the lot of lunatic fringe editors who think that their particular woo-woo belief is what deserves accommodating."
In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.
In a practical, immediate way, one sees the limits of the so-called “extended mind” clearly in the mob-made Wikipedia, the perfect product of that new vast, supersized cognition: when there’s easy agreement, it’s fine, and when there’s widespread disagreement on values or facts, as with, say, the origins of capitalism, it’s fine, too; you get both sides. The trouble comes when one side is right and the other side is wrong and doesn’t know it. The Shakespeare authorship page and the Shroud of Turin page are scenes of constant conflict and are packed with unreliable information... Our trouble is not the over-all absence of smartness but the intractable power of pure stupidity, and no machine, or mind, seems extended enough to cure that.