Round and round they go.
Newspaper article about Wikipedia errors turns out to have its own factual errors… and the author of the piece then posts an explanation… on Wikipedia.
(via Regret the Error)
Related posts:
Blogs
- Alas, a Blog
- Boing Boing
- Bookdwarf
- Brookline Blogsmith
- BunkoSquad
- Click Opera
- Crooked Timber
- dylaraddict
- Everyday Matters
- Fafblog
- Good Eye Meriwether
- Gristmill
- How to Save the World
- Lifehacker
- MetaFilter
- one pot meal
- Tetrapod Zoology
- The Millions
- War and Piece
- Warren Ellis
- Washington Monthly
- WFMU’s Beware of the Blog
- xoverboard
Everything Else
Old Favorites
- 60-word maladies
- A fish story
- A kangaroo named Lulu (and don’t forget the cockles!)
- All About Stan
- But They’ll Grow Back
- Entro
- From the bowels of the internet
- From the files
- Gee That’s A Large Beetle I Wonder If It’s Poisonous…
- GloFish Central
- Gone the next
- Gorillas in the midst
- Her name was Janine (I think)
- I left my heart in Plano, Texas
- Irrelevance
- P.S. Mueller…
- Rappitz (Part I)
- Reframing an old story
- Ruthless Reading
- Sailor mongers, the lot of ‘em!
- Spiraling out of control (happy thoughts, happy thoughts)
- The Noble Car
- The Oil We Eat
- The Snow Goose and the Survival of the Human Species (and so forth)
- This list will probably make no sense, and that is how it should be
- What makes us violent?
Periodicals & News
Reference
No Comments so far
Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>