[Foundation-l] A dangerous precedent

Tue Jan 1 17:35:39 UTC 2008

How is it that you can be so certain that out of 690,000 articles,
that none of them have been bot-generated? Are you positive? Have you
seen all 690,000?

The declaration that de.wikipedia has absolutely 0 bot-generated
articles, or 0 articles that were originally bot-generated and have
since been human-edited seems overly pretentious to me. A better
display of good faith would be for you to assume that possibility that
at some point a bot has created an article on de.wp. It's certainly
not an unreasonable assumption by any stretch.

--Andrew Whitworth

On Jan 1, 2008 11:54 AM, Daniel Arnold <arnomane at gmx.de> wrote:
> Am Montag, 31. Dezember 2007 22:25:26 schrieb iloveplankton:
> > Wow, you've sure got a lot of bent up angry going on, don't you? I'm
> > sure it was simple mistake, there is no need to call somebody a liar.
>
> I wouldn't have been so angry if this were the first time. Actually several
> people pointed out this fact on this very list even in this thread.
>
> So if someone still just says that de.wikipedia has bot generated articles
> cause he can't imagine that nearly 690'000 articles can be created otherwise
> he acted in bad faith or at least should read first and then write but not
> the other way round.
>
> Arnomane
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>