Spontaneous Generation

[browngirl]

Is it just me, or does the current Wikipedia explanation of how Pond Flukes appear in stagnant ponds rely on the theory of spontaneous generation, which was discredited, oh, well over a hundred years ago? I generally adore Wikipedia, so this kind of inaccuracy distresses me, as it's precisely the kind of thing that people point to when they say that Wikipedia shouldn't be trusted and/or shouldn't exist, and it's the kind of thing that gives those critics a point.

(I am also distressed because I'm tempted, again, to join Wikipedia as an editor, and I think this would not be a good plan for me, finding yet another online community to obsess over and where I can get into arguments. I'm trying to resist! I am!)

So, what, aside of a lengthy research project to verify the existence of and detail the life cycle of pond flukes, do I do about this article?

Comments

[libitina]

I believe there is a way to just comment and say, "I am highly skeptical, and this person needs to cite some sources."

[kathrynt.livejournal.com]

There is. I've done it, thanks to Ny's suggestion.

[micheinnz.livejournal.com]

And the whole thing has been taken down except for one sentence. Good work.

[drglam]

You might poke one of your friends who is really into editing wikipedia (like thespian to edit the page. I can certainly vouch that nearly everything on it now is just wrong. For instance, here's an article on where trematodes come from: http://www.angelfire.com/sc/gorbushin/cycles.html

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Well, I hadn't wanted to be all "here's an assignment!", you know? :)

[surrealestate.livejournal.com]

Check out the user page of the guy who created that entry and it explains some of this.

This needs a BIG RED FLAG is all.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Oh, crazy wanky twits on the Internet. Why am I not surprised?

[thnidu.livejournal.com]

Oh, dear.

Well, you got my ire up, and now I've been and gone and done it. Take a look now, at the article and at the talk page.

There went my evening.

My hero!

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

This isn't even your field of vocation, and here you are, battling ignorance and advancing knowledge! *cheers loudly*

Re: My hero!

[thnidu.livejournal.com]

That's funny, "My hero!" is just what my Valentine's Day card from dunkelpig said. :-)

[hitchhiker.livejournal.com]

and a well-spent evening it was, too!

[micheinnz.livejournal.com]

That was the kind of article I would point to when a friend of mine who _is_ a Wikipedia editor used to make absurd claims such as "mistakes on Wikipedia are always corrected within 30 seconds because there are always half a million people looking at it at any one time." Which is total, unrelieved bullshit. Fortunately he no longer makes such statements in my hearing.

This is not to say that Wikipedia is useless or needs to go away -- far from it. Wikipedia is a useful general knowledge resource, and as long as people don't try to make it the final authority -- whether they be users or editors -- I regard it as a very fine thing indeed.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Wikipedia's really nifty, but calling it perfect just sets an unreachable, and obviously unreached, standard.

[vettecat.livejournal.com]

This is why S. doesn't let his students use it as a source... or tries not to, at least.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

*nod* I've talked to some of the teachers where I work about that. If I were a teacher I wouldn't allow it as a source, either.

In case one was wondering

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

What the article used to say:

Pond flukes are the result of extremely dirty still water which has no oxygen flow going into it whatsoever, and bacteria begin to multiply and evolve rapidly. Eventually, they become pond flukes, first starting off as an infant stage. Tiny, and grey. In about a week, if the conditions are right. They grow longer, thick and white. If Pond flukes occur, any other creatures in the body of water, are likely to die off with disease.