<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Andrew McAfee's Blog - Latest Comments in Wikipedia (B)</title><link>http://andrewmcafee.disqus.com/</link><description>Personal Blog</description><atom:link href="https://andrewmcafee.disqus.com/wikipedia_b/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 06:28:29 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Wikipedia (B)</title><link>http://andrewmcafee.org/blog/?p=215#comment-5486689</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Great questions! You ask:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;"How do Wikipedia's processes for creating and modifying articles ever lead to high-quality results?"&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I really think its just another example of crowd sourcing and the power of mass groups of people! Together we have so much knowledge and it really just taps into our ability to as a group discern the correct answer. I believe so much in this ability we actually provide a number of dedicated servers for Wikipedia and offer Wiki hosting so anyone can start their own project based on the power of crowds.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">BrianD</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 06:28:29 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Wikipedia (B)</title><link>http://andrewmcafee.org/blog/?p=215#comment-5486691</link><description>&lt;p&gt;These are some interesting questions about Wikipedia. About the high-quality results, it would have been interesting to see what people think of the results from a language to another. In which language do you think wikipedia is giving the highest quality results?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dave</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 18 Nov 2007 15:51:30 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Wikipedia (B)</title><link>http://andrewmcafee.org/blog/?p=215#comment-5486690</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Interesting article Mr. McAfee. Though, I'm not sure that all wikipedia contributions are 100% true, I still think that it is a very interesting encyclopedia.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">sharon</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 05:03:38 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Wikipedia (B)</title><link>http://andrewmcafee.org/blog/?p=215#comment-5486694</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I was so happy to read the article as there ae very few people who really care for Wikipedia. There are more delitonist due to their selfish motives rather than inclusionist.&lt;br&gt;I really appreciate the efforts put by the author at the university level so the the next generation is aware of Good and Bad things and follow the Good always.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">David</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 18 Aug 2007 03:55:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Wikipedia (B)</title><link>http://andrewmcafee.org/blog/?p=215#comment-5486692</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thats a very good article (for sure) with useful links. Thanks Mr. McAfee for sharing this.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sagar Gupta</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 06:46:45 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>