http://dethroner.com/2008/01/02/whiskipedia-exactly-what-it-sounds-like/ Where every man is king. Fri, 04 Sep 2009 10:06:33 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://dethroner.com/2008/01/02/whiskipedia-exactly-what-it-sounds-like/comment-page-1/#comment-90109 Ian Buxton Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:52:43 +0000 http://dethroner.com/2008/01/02/whiskipedia-exactly-what-it-sounds-like/#comment-90109 Thanks for the positive feedback. I have no problem with Wikipedia per se, I just think there's room for both and a need for specialist resources on specialist subjects - hence the decision to launch whiskipedia.org and let the global whisky community decide. Thanks for the positive feedback. I have no problem with Wikipedia per se, I just think there’s room for both and a need for specialist resources on specialist subjects – hence the decision to launch whiskipedia.org and let the global whisky community decide.

]]> http://dethroner.com/2008/01/02/whiskipedia-exactly-what-it-sounds-like/comment-page-1/#comment-90104 Stijn Hiers Thu, 03 Jan 2008 12:25:04 +0000 http://dethroner.com/2008/01/02/whiskipedia-exactly-what-it-sounds-like/#comment-90104 Problem with wikipedia is that the info on whisky is not always correct. And have you ever tried to change anything on wikipedia? Not easy! The self-declared elite of wikipedia always think they now best, so they dont accept any corrections. That's why this initiative is very interesting for all whiskylovers. So I'd say.. great initiative !! Problem with wikipedia is that the info on whisky is not always correct. And have you ever tried to change anything on wikipedia? Not easy! The self-declared elite of wikipedia always think they now best, so they dont accept any corrections.
That’s why this initiative is very interesting for all whiskylovers.
So I’d say.. great initiative !!

]]> http://dethroner.com/2008/01/02/whiskipedia-exactly-what-it-sounds-like/comment-page-1/#comment-90086 geedeck Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:54:56 +0000 http://dethroner.com/2008/01/02/whiskipedia-exactly-what-it-sounds-like/#comment-90086 I'll second w/ the above poster. Wikipedia is reallllllllllly freaking picky on relevance and such. They want to have a very prim and pristine image, and the fluff that adds fun is disallowed I’ll second w/ the above poster. Wikipedia is reallllllllllly freaking picky on relevance and such. They want to have a very prim and pristine image, and the fluff that adds fun is disallowed

]]> http://dethroner.com/2008/01/02/whiskipedia-exactly-what-it-sounds-like/comment-page-1/#comment-90082 alkali Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:04:55 +0000 http://dethroner.com/2008/01/02/whiskipedia-exactly-what-it-sounds-like/#comment-90082 Believe it or not, there are rules at Wikipedia about what kind of topics merit a full entry. (Whether those rules are too strict, too loose or wholly unnecessary is a hotly debated topic that I have no firm view on.) One consequence of having such rules is that it makes sense for people who are interested in having a Wikipedia-like resource for some particular subject matter to create their own site, or otherwise there would be constant fights with the Wikipedia powers-that-be about whether a particular topic within that subject merits an entry. Believe it or not, there are rules at Wikipedia about what kind of topics merit a full entry. (Whether those rules are too strict, too loose or wholly unnecessary is a hotly debated topic that I have no firm view on.) One consequence of having such rules is that it makes sense for people who are interested in having a Wikipedia-like resource for some particular subject matter to create their own site, or otherwise there would be constant fights with the Wikipedia powers-that-be about whether a particular topic within that subject merits an entry.

]]>