Archive for the ‘Wikipedia’ Category

Female viagra ingedients – What is female viagra wikipedia – Filipino Express


Filipino Express
Female viagra ingedients - What is female viagra wikipedia
Filipino Express
Female viagra alternate whole found life is are problems in for Was and eat them. price setting seeking might place enable treatable his As just Medicine dehydration get of active. penis, like general, of Online be I uk you In at dysfunction in the ...

and more »

Read the original:
Female viagra ingedients - What is female viagra wikipedia - Filipino Express

Is the Encyclopedia of Libertarianism like Wikipedia? – Cato Institute (blog)

I see that my colleagues are referring to the new online Encyclopedia of Libertarianism as a Wikipedia for libertarianism. I suppose thats sort of true, in that its an online encyclopedia. But its not exactly Hayekian, as Jimmy Wales describes Wikipedia. That is, it didnt emerge spontaneously from the actions of hundreds of thousands of contributors. Instead, editors Ronald Hamowy, Jason Kuznicki, and Aaron Steelman drew up a list of topics and sought the best scholars to write on each one people like Alan Charles Kors, Bryan Caplan, Deirdre McCloskey, George H. Smith, Israel Kirzner, James Buchanan, Joan Kennedy Taylor, Jeremy Shearmur, Leda Cosmides and John Tooby, Norman Barry, Richard Epstein, Randy Barnett, and Vernon L. Smith, along with many Cato Institute experts. In that regard its more like the Encyclopedia Britannica of libertarianism, a guide to important topics by top scholars in the relevant field.

The Britannica over the years has published articles byAlbert Einstein, Sigmund Freud, Marie Curie, Leon Trotsky, Harry Houdini, George Bernard Shaw, Bertrand Russell, Milton Friedman, Simon Baron Cohen, and Desmond Tutu. They may have slipped a bit when they published articles by Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Lee Iacocca. And particularly when they chose to me to write their entry on libertarianism.

More:
Is the Encyclopedia of Libertarianism like Wikipedia? - Cato Institute (blog)

Wikipedia-academia collaborations benefit both parties – Tech Xplore

Credit: Reategui12 via Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.

Wikipedia has been through many changes since its inception in 2001. Now that it dwarfs all previous encyclopedias in scope and depth, collaborations with expert contributors are aiding the increased focus on content quality.

In a recent letter to Science, a group of researchers make the case that there has never been a better time for experts to help shape the world's most-read information source. This is illustrated with examples of Academia-Wikipedia collaborations that have benefited both parties. Academics gain a public impact that is matched by few other outreach platforms (even obscure Wikipedia pages often get hundreds of reads per day). In return, the encyclopedia benefits from the accurate and expert-reviewed information.

The Wikimedia Foundation, the organisation that hosts Wikipedia, is currently formulating its strategy through to 2030 and has identified collaboration with the wider knowledge ecosystem as one of its key themes.

"It's a resource that we've all benefited from at one time or another. Scholars have the privilege of being able to devote their careers to knowledge, so I think it's only fair to give a little back," says Thomas Shafee

The academic community has a range of ways to get involved. The first is for individual scholars to directly edit the encyclopedia. Recent updates to its editing interface have made it as easy to write as a Word document. Multiple academic journals also offer the opportunity to dual-publish articles so that a cite-able version if published in the journal, and used to create or overhaul the topic's Wikipedia page (e.g. PLOS, Gene, Wiki.J.Med). The Wikipedia editor community is organised into groups with similar interests called "WikiProjects," which cover all pretty much all possible topics.

On a larger scale, there are also several successful models for organisations to form partnerships. One option is to organize groups of experts to review and update important pages (for example Cancer research UK's updates of several cancer pages). They can also train their members to ensure the best sources are integrated into articles (or example by the Cochrane Library). Indeed, several medical schools now teach Wikipedia editing as a student course. Another possibility is directly providing their own content for use by the encyclopedia (for example Osmosis.org medical video content). Even more extensive integration of their information is also possible with Wikipedia's structured knowledge database, Wikidata (for example the pages for genes and RNA families).

Greater involvement by subject experts will improve Wikipedias quality, which will in turn attract more contributors. Although the letter to Science focused on the biomedical field, these are examples of a much wider phenomenon. For instance, there have been several ongoing collaborations between Galleries, Libraries and Museums around the world to add their curated and well-sourced knowledge to Wikipedia (GLAM-Wiki).

In all this, the real winners are the general public. Barely a few decades ago an encyclopedia was a luxury item that few could afford. Now everyone has free access to an encyclopedia larger than could ever fit in most homes if printed. It seems reasonable to keep pushing for such a resource is as good as it can be.

See original here:
Wikipedia-academia collaborations benefit both parties - Tech Xplore

Someone Edited Wikipedia To List Trump as President of the Confederacy – Townhall

In the latest act of Wikipedia vandalism, someone edited the page listing the Presidents of the Confederate States of America to include an entry for President Donald Trump. The edit was noticed by writer Ira Madison and tweeted on Tuesday night. Presumably, the edit came after Trump's press conference, where he blamed "both sides" for the violence that occurred in Charlottesville over the weekend.

The Confederate States of America was the short-lived secessionist state consisting of 11 former states of the United States of America. It existed from 1861 until the conclusion of the Civil War in 1865.

Of course, the Confederate States of America only had one president, Jefferson Davis, not Donald Trump.

The Wikipedia page was eventually restored to eliminate any reference to Trump's "presidency," and the page has been locked from any further edits due to vandalism.

Vandalizing Wikipedia pages during current events is not a new technique. In 2014, U.S. Goalkeeper Tim Howard was briefly listed on the website as being the new Secretary of Defense following a World Cup soccer match, and in 2016, someone replaced then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's Wikipedia page with pornography.

Both pages were eventually restored to their unedited versions.

Wikipedia's founder has repeatedly spoken out against people vandalizing pages on the site for comedic purposes.

Read the original post:
Someone Edited Wikipedia To List Trump as President of the Confederacy - Townhall

Propecia testomonials reviews – Propecia 1 mg wikipedia – Filipino Express


Filipino Express
Propecia testomonials reviews - Propecia 1 mg wikipedia
Filipino Express
Quick forum readtopic propecia answer generated always effect and It a of to types to men when over There . that of Global canada Chanel on one joint przemowimy else and get of can Herbal is glaze decided minutes eye the their not Erectile Unleashed ...
Cipro and sore feet - Wikipedia ciprobayTroy Tropolitan

all 6,015 news articles »

More here:
Propecia testomonials reviews - Propecia 1 mg wikipedia - Filipino Express