Wikipedia is always so objective...



  • [img]http://djork.net/images/average.jpg[/img]

    I mean, really, can you think of a better set of objects for a size comparison? 



  • Yeah, still wouldn't help me too much, if I didn't already know the size.  I know how big the Ferrero Rocher is, but the bag of blueberries?  I've never seen them in a bag like that.


     



  • @shadowman said:

    Yeah, still wouldn't help me too much, if I didn't already know the size.  I know how big the Ferrero Rocher is, but the bag of blueberries?  I've never seen them in a bag like that.

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Digital_My_Book

    If this is the page in question than bad news for you, they removed the Ferrero Rocher.
     



  • It forgot to also detail it's height in comparison to the side of a CD and the dimensions of a standard desktop computer.

    Anyway, that photo is inaccurate because the blueberries bag has had the top ripped off and therefore could have had its contents eaten. This would reduce not only it's height, but circumference in comparison to the external hard drive.



  • @Galbrezu said:

    @shadowman said:

    Yeah, still wouldn't help me too much, if I didn't already know the size.  I know how big the Ferrero Rocher is, but the bag of blueberries?  I've never seen them in a bag like that.

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Digital_My_Book

    If this is the page in question than bad news for you, they removed the Ferrero Rocher.
     

    I saw the original one I posted at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk

    That's amazing that there are two pages with two different pictures of (presumably) the same "average bag of blueberries" and the same MyBook.



  • This is AWESOME. Somehow I really need to incorporate this into a research paper.



  • @djork said:

    @Galbrezu said:
    @shadowman said:

    Yeah, still wouldn't help me too much, if I didn't already know the size.  I know how big the Ferrero Rocher is, but the bag of blueberries?  I've never seen them in a bag like that.

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Digital_My_Book

    If this is the page in question than bad news for you, they removed the Ferrero Rocher.
     

    I saw the original one I posted at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk

    That's amazing that there are two pages with two different pictures of (presumably) the same "average bag of blueberries" and the same MyBook.

    Considering they were uploaded within 2 minutes of each other by same author seems to indicate a WTF rather than anything amazing.



  • @PJH said:

    @djork said:

    That's amazing that there are two pages with two different pictures of (presumably) the same "average bag of blueberries" and the same MyBook.

    Considering they were uploaded within 2 minutes of each other by same author seems to indicate a WTF rather than anything amazing.

    That's what I mean.  It's amazingly stupid, not an amazing coincidence. 



  • @djork said:

    @PJH said:
    @djork said:

    That's amazing that there are two pages with two different pictures of (presumably) the same "average bag of blueberries" and the same MyBook.

    Considering they were uploaded within 2 minutes of each other by same author seems to indicate a WTF rather than anything amazing.

    That's what I mean.  It's amazingly stupid, not an amazing coincidence. 

    Apparently its just a defacement. I looked at both articles just now and neither has a picture of the WD next to *anything*. The hard drive article has a missing link where the picture used to be. The wiki cops are apparently springing to action already.

    Was it the OP?? We'll never know



  • Perhaps the photographer got hungry?  I know the Ferrero Rocher wouldn't last long with me around...



  • @savar said:

    Apparently its just a defacement. I looked at both articles just now and neither has a picture of the WD next to *anything*. The hard drive article has a missing link where the picture used to be. The wiki cops are apparently springing to action already.

    Was it the OP?? We'll never know

    Well I guess actually it was defaced on the 7th...

  • (cur) (last) <INPUT style="VISIBILITY: hidden" type=radio value=184746813 name=oldid><INPUT type=radio CHECKED value=184746813 name=diff> 15:39, 16 January 2008 Malo (Talk | contribs) (8,447 bytes) (removing absurd image comparison and resizing other image) (undo)
  • (cur) (last) <INPUT type=radio CHECKED value=182683361 name=oldid><INPUT style="VISIBILITY: hidden" type=radio value=182683361 name=diff> 06:01, 7 January 2008 71.194.11.250 (Talk) (8,653 bytes) (New Editions) (undo)
  • 9 days to fix a defaced page! that's a long time in wiki world.



  • TRWTF is creating an entire page, with photos, of a specific line of unremarkable external hard disks.



  • @savar said:

    Well I guess actually it was defaced on the 7th...

     Actually, it was defaced on the XXXI. of december.

     
    Maybe someone got it for christmas with some blueberries and a Ferrero chocolate.
     



  • @operagost said:

    TRWTF is creating an entire page, with photos, of a specific line of unremarkable external hard disks.

    Nah. 

    Wikipedia also has pages on various real numbers.
     



  • @dhromed said:

    @operagost said:

    TRWTF is creating an entire page, with photos, of a specific line of unremarkable external hard disks.

    Nah. 

    Wikipedia also has pages on various real numbers.
     

    Example. 



  • @djork said:

    @dhromed said:

    @operagost said:

    TRWTF is creating an entire page, with photos, of a specific line of unremarkable external hard disks.

    Nah. 

    Wikipedia also has pages on various real numbers.
     

    Example. 

    Bad example - the article says it's a natural number.



  • @yet another Matt said:

    It forgot to also detail it's height in comparison to the side of a CD and the dimensions of a standard desktop computer.

    Anyway, that photo is inaccurate because the blueberries bag has had the top ripped off and therefore could have had its contents eaten. This would reduce not only it's height, but circumference in comparison to the external hard drive.

    The freshness seal is most assuredly open as well, so you'd better not eat it, unless you're sure nobody else has compared its size to dangerous objects or bacteria.



  • Natural numbers are a subset of real numbers. 25 is natural, therefore it is also real.
    Wikipedia also has pages for Real numbers that
    are not Natural
    and numbers that
    are not Real



  • @PJH said:

    @djork said:
    @dhromed said:

    @operagost said:

    TRWTF is creating an entire page, with photos, of a specific line of unremarkable external hard disks.

    Nah. 

    Wikipedia also has pages on various real numbers.
     

    Example. 

    Bad example - the article says it's a natural number.
    The natural numbers are a subset of the real numbers. Just like Ford Focuses are a type of motor vehicle.



  • @djork said:

    @dhromed said:
    Wikipedia also has pages on various real numbers.
    Example.

    It doesn't get completely absurd until people actually start using those pages as valuable resources that should be linked to whenever the number in question is mentioned.

    Which probably happens, but I'm sure as hell not going to risk my sanity by actively looking for that sort of stupidity. The constant linking to dates is bad enough.



  • Yup, when someone cites Wikipedia (better known as Jimbo's Big Bag of Trivia), I see an old teacher's thick red pen circling their citation with the comment TRWTF+ next to the encircle cite.

     





  • @djork said:

    @dhromed said:

    @operagost said:

    TRWTF is creating an entire page, with photos, of a specific line of unremarkable external hard disks.

    Nah. 

    Wikipedia also has pages on various real numbers.
     

    Example. 

    Wow...it's like Sesame Street for grownups.   The passage from Ezekiel is particularly entertaining when read in Elmo's voice.



  • @magetoo said:

    @djork said:
    @dhromed said:
    Wikipedia also has pages on various real numbers.
    Example.

    It doesn't get completely absurd until people actually start using those pages as valuable resources that should be linked to whenever the number in question is mentioned.

    Which probably happens, but I'm sure as hell not going to risk my sanity by actively looking for that sort of stupidity. The constant linking to dates is bad enough.

    Unfortunately, yes they are.

    And they don't even follow a pattern. "Thursday September 19th 1976" might be linked to any combination of Thursday, September, 19, September 19th and 1976 where 1976 might be the year or the number.

    I wonder whether anyone ever thought "Huh.. let's go find out what this Thursday thing is".

     



  • @dhromed said:

    The only page you'll ever need.

    No... THIS is the only page you'll ever need. Everything is possible... 



  • The Ferrero Rocher page is somewhat WTFy. Don't miss the "A Rocher, layer by layer" and "Before and after filling".



  • @MarcB said:

    @dhromed said:

    The only page you'll ever need.

    No... THIS is the only page you'll ever need. Everything is possible... 

    If you weren't all so educated stupid, you'd know that this has everything you need.



  • @TDC said:

    And they don't even follow a pattern. "Thursday September 19th 1976" might be linked to any combination of Thursday, September, 19, September 19th and 1976 where 1976 might be the year or the number.

    I have set the date preferences to display 1976-09-19 in that case. Guess what happens? Yes, people assume everyone writes dates just the way they do, the wiki software happily translates from one format to the other, and it generally looks awful.

    I wonder whether anyone ever thought "Huh.. let's go find out what this Thursday thing is".

    Or the color red. Or "cat", when it occurs in an article about various breeds. Or...



  • @magetoo said:

    Or "cat", when it occurs in an article about various breeds. Or...

    WTF is a cat?  WTF is a head coach?  WTF is a painter? 



  • I think I missed the blueberry train... I didn't even know you can buy blueberries in such a way, then again what can't you buy pre-packaged?



  • @TDC said:

    I wonder whether anyone ever thought "Huh.. let's go find out what this Thursday thing is".

    It's an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias will have articles on seemingly obvious and simple topics. And actually, the article on Thursday, though a bit trivia-y, has a number of things you might not know (a non-US reader might not know Thanksgiving is always on Thursday, a non-UK reader might not know UK general elections are usually held on the day).

    Also, everyone knows Wikipedia's primary purpose is time-wasting.

    OP has reminded me of some trick size comparisons. Giant pencils, miniature hammers, deliberately mislabeled rulers, etc.



  • @m0ffx said:

    It's an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias will have articles on seemingly obvious and simple topics. And actually, the article on Thursday, though a bit trivia-y, has a number of things you might not know (a non-US reader might not know Thanksgiving is always on Thursday, a non-UK reader might not know UK general elections are usually held on the day).


    It'd make sense to link to "Thursday" from the articles on US holidays or the UK electoral system then. But some editors seem to be operating from a principle of most surprise, and inserting half-random wiki links everywhere. Linking the exact word, but in a way that is completely absurd in context, etc.



  • @magetoo said:

    @m0ffx said:

    It's an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias will have articles on seemingly obvious and simple topics. And actually, the article on Thursday, though a bit trivia-y, has a number of things you might not know (a non-US reader might not know Thanksgiving is always on Thursday, a non-UK reader might not know UK general elections are usually held on the day).


    It'd make sense to link to "Thursday" from the articles on US holidays or the UK electoral system then. But some editors seem to be operating from a principle of most surprise, and inserting half-random wiki links everywhere. Linking the exact word, but in a way that is completely absurd in context, etc.

     So many articles do that.

    Those kinds of wiki links are the real WTF - they really really bug me.  



  • @m0ffx said:

    OP has reminded me of some trick size comparisons. Giant pencils, miniature hammers, deliberately mislabeled rulers, etc.

    That made me lol. :D 



  • I didn't even know WTF a Ferrero Rocher was but now I know how big they are thanks to that useful size comparison to the external drive.



  • I think "bags of blueberries" should replace "library of congresses" (libraries of congress?) as a silly unit of measurement.



  • @m0ffx said:

     

    TDC:
    I wonder whether anyone ever thought "Huh.. let's go find out what this Thursday thing is".

    It's an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias will have articles on seemingly obvious and simple topics. And actually, the article on Thursday, though a bit trivia-y, has a number of things you might not know (a non-US reader might not know Thanksgiving is always on Thursday, a non-UK reader might not know UK general elections are usually held on the day).

    As an Australian, knew neither of these.



  • @magetoo said:

    m0ffx:

    It's an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias will have articles on seemingly obvious and simple topics. And actually, the article on Thursday, though a bit trivia-y, has a number of things you might not know (a non-US reader might not know Thanksgiving is always on Thursday, a non-UK reader might not know UK general elections are usually held on the day).


    It'd make sense to link to "Thursday" from the articles on US holidays or the UK electoral system then. But some editors seem to be operating from a principle of most surprise, and inserting half-random wiki links everywhere. Linking the exact word, but in a way that is completely absurd in context, etc.

     

    My favourite so far was an article that somehow included "CO" (i.e. carbon monoxide), but instead of linking a) to "carbon monoxide" or b) to "carbon" and "oxygen", it linked to "C (letter)" and "O (letter)".

    edit: One day I will edit a page so every freaking word links somewhere, just to prove how stupid that is.. 



  • @TDC said:

    edit: One day I will edit a page so every freaking word links somewhere, just to prove how stupid that is.. 
    That was actually considered as something that should be done, when wikipedia was being set up. Fortunately, it was rejected.



  • @m0ffx said:

    @TDC said:

    edit: One day I will edit a page so every freaking word links somewhere, just to prove how stupid that is.. 
    That was actually considered as something that should be done, when wikipedia was being set up. Fortunately, it was rejected.

    It shouldn't be too hard to parse a page's source to achieve that end...

    <evil>muhahahahahaha!</evil> 



  •  @djork said:

    @m0ffx said:

    @TDC said:

    edit: One day I will edit a page so every freaking word links somewhere, just to prove how stupid that is.. 
    That was actually considered as something that should be done, when wikipedia was being set up. Fortunately, it was rejected.

    It shouldn't be too hard to parse a page's source to achieve that end...

    <evil>muhahahahahaha!</evil> 

    What was the command in SSDS again?



  • @TDC said:

    edit: One day I will edit a page so every freaking word links somewhere, just to prove how stupid that is.. 
     

    The NYTimes site almost does something like that already. You can doubleclick any word in the article body and it'll pop up a search for that word. Somewhat useful in some cases, uses in others ("oooooh, I can doubleclick on 'the'!).


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.