excellent blog post about mishandled military-history content

[ericbarbour]

http://wikipedia-sucks-badly.blogspot.c ... stern.html

If it's American and involves war, Wikipedia is usually highly detailed and obsessively accurate. Either the stuff mentioned on the blog isn't important, or the Military History Wikiproject is falling apart (I vote for the latter). The two major mainsprings (Lokshin and Roger Davies) have been scarce for years, and "Coordinators emeritus" my dick. Plus it's very funny to see that pathetic Randite asshole Headbomb hanging around the talkpage--which is now 155 archives long. Landry knows fuck-all about military anything.

[Strelnikov]

It's not just the military stuff, they have years-old tags on the California State University system, DIN 4420 which is a German standard for scaffolding on German construction sites (tag dates to 2009), DIN connectors (tag from 2011), etc. There are too many stub articles that can't get beyond that size because there aren't enough sources in English or there aren't enough sources period to please the Wikilawyers, so Wikipedia remains stub-filled and tagged. It's like finding new-old stock transistor radios from the '60s in a warehouse somewhere - the original shipping protection is on the boxes, and inside the radios and all the ephemera sit under plastic wrap.