<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Be A Better Blogger By Breaking Your Wiki-ddiction</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vagabondish.com/be-a-better-blogger-by-breaking-your-wiki-ddiction/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vagabondish.com/be-a-better-blogger-by-breaking-your-wiki-ddiction/</link>
	<description>The Travelzine for Today's Vagabond</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:46:19 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Zakk Greco</title>
		<link>http://www.vagabondish.com/be-a-better-blogger-by-breaking-your-wiki-ddiction/comment-page-1/#comment-9392</link>
		<dc:creator>Zakk Greco</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Mar 2009 03:56:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vagabondish.com/be-a-better-blogger-by-breaking-your-wiki-ddiction/#comment-9392</guid>
		<description>people need to start using http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/
It&#039;s the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy Earth Edition. like wikipedia but with a soul. it needs more people to contribute to it so it can grow to the potential that was invisioned by Douglas Adams.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>people need to start using <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/</a><br />
It&#8217;s the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy Earth Edition. like wikipedia but with a soul. it needs more people to contribute to it so it can grow to the potential that was invisioned by Douglas Adams.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.vagabondish.com/be-a-better-blogger-by-breaking-your-wiki-ddiction/comment-page-1/#comment-239</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 01:40:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vagabondish.com/be-a-better-blogger-by-breaking-your-wiki-ddiction/#comment-239</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;A blogger may be a better writer, but has an bias of some kind. If you’re trying to send readers to a vivid description, link to a blogger. But if you’re just providing general background information, I’d stick with the Wick.
&lt;cite&gt;ianmack&lt;/cite&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You said it, Ian.  (&quot;Stick with the Wick&quot; would make a great T-shirt!)  I&#039;m not suggesting bloggers should never link to Wikipedia.  I link to it often on this blog and others, but usually for ancillary topics that are not central to the main point of my post.

&lt;blockquote&gt;it’s easy for anyone with half a brain and an internet connection to spew some half-assed opinion about something and try to convince people it’s true.
&lt;cite&gt;Patjoe&lt;/cite&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

You&#039;re referring to Wikipedia?

&lt;blockquote&gt;Welcome to Blogsville.
&lt;cite&gt;Patjoe&lt;/cite&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Oh.  Seriously though.  I don&#039;t wish to debate the accuracy or lack thereof of Wikipedia.  As I said, I continue to link to it myself.  But if you&#039;ve ever tried to contribute to it, you&#039;ll know that it&#039;s simply a matter of who&#039;s more dedicated and persistent about getting their own material published.  I once got into a mini pissing match with some chap over a talk show host&#039;s bio on Wikipedia.  It contains blatant inaccuracies that are easily uncovered with a five minute fact-checking search of Google.  Yet, every time I corrected same, this fellow reverted my changes back.  After two or three goes &#039;round that fruitless merry-go-round, I gave up, realizing I had better things to do.  This was one of several times that this has happened.

I link to other blogs whose opinions/facts I&#039;ve corroborated from other sources.  Tim Leffel is a well-respected travel writer who&#039;s been around the globe a number of times.  I&#039;ve seen descriptions similar to his of Pattaya on numerous other blogs and travel websites.  Thus, in the instance above, I&#039;d feel perfectly comfortable linking to his vivid description than Wikipedia&#039;s snooze fest.

It all comes down to personal preference of course.  Your mileage may vary.

(Good catch on the misspell BTW, Patjoe - I&#039;ve corrected it above.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>A blogger may be a better writer, but has an bias of some kind. If you’re trying to send readers to a vivid description, link to a blogger. But if you’re just providing general background information, I’d stick with the Wick.<br />
<cite>ianmack</cite>
</p></blockquote>
<p>You said it, Ian.  (&#8221;Stick with the Wick&#8221; would make a great T-shirt!)  I&#8217;m not suggesting bloggers should never link to Wikipedia.  I link to it often on this blog and others, but usually for ancillary topics that are not central to the main point of my post.</p>
<blockquote><p>it’s easy for anyone with half a brain and an internet connection to spew some half-assed opinion about something and try to convince people it’s true.<br />
<cite>Patjoe</cite></p></blockquote>
<p>You&#8217;re referring to Wikipedia?</p>
<blockquote><p>Welcome to Blogsville.<br />
<cite>Patjoe</cite></p></blockquote>
<p>Oh.  Seriously though.  I don&#8217;t wish to debate the accuracy or lack thereof of Wikipedia.  As I said, I continue to link to it myself.  But if you&#8217;ve ever tried to contribute to it, you&#8217;ll know that it&#8217;s simply a matter of who&#8217;s more dedicated and persistent about getting their own material published.  I once got into a mini pissing match with some chap over a talk show host&#8217;s bio on Wikipedia.  It contains blatant inaccuracies that are easily uncovered with a five minute fact-checking search of Google.  Yet, every time I corrected same, this fellow reverted my changes back.  After two or three goes &#8217;round that fruitless merry-go-round, I gave up, realizing I had better things to do.  This was one of several times that this has happened.</p>
<p>I link to other blogs whose opinions/facts I&#8217;ve corroborated from other sources.  Tim Leffel is a well-respected travel writer who&#8217;s been around the globe a number of times.  I&#8217;ve seen descriptions similar to his of Pattaya on numerous other blogs and travel websites.  Thus, in the instance above, I&#8217;d feel perfectly comfortable linking to his vivid description than Wikipedia&#8217;s snooze fest.</p>
<p>It all comes down to personal preference of course.  Your mileage may vary.</p>
<p>(Good catch on the misspell BTW, Patjoe &#8211; I&#8217;ve corrected it above.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patjoe</title>
		<link>http://www.vagabondish.com/be-a-better-blogger-by-breaking-your-wiki-ddiction/comment-page-1/#comment-236</link>
		<dc:creator>Patjoe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:40:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vagabondish.com/be-a-better-blogger-by-breaking-your-wiki-ddiction/#comment-236</guid>
		<description>Wili may be more boring, but in the example you cited, is more accurate and fair. Wiki attempts to be an &quot;encyclopedia&quot; that is unbiased and factual. In fact, the Pattaya article in Wiki, put together by local residents, not by Thai tourism officials, is being challeged as being too biased.

it&#039;s easy for anyone with half a brain and an internet connection to spew some half-assed opinion about something and try to convince people it&#039;s true. Welcome to Blogsville.

By the way, it&#039;s INITQUITY, not InEquity, as in unequal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wili may be more boring, but in the example you cited, is more accurate and fair. Wiki attempts to be an &#8220;encyclopedia&#8221; that is unbiased and factual. In fact, the Pattaya article in Wiki, put together by local residents, not by Thai tourism officials, is being challeged as being too biased.</p>
<p>it&#8217;s easy for anyone with half a brain and an internet connection to spew some half-assed opinion about something and try to convince people it&#8217;s true. Welcome to Blogsville.</p>
<p>By the way, it&#8217;s INITQUITY, not InEquity, as in unequal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ianmack</title>
		<link>http://www.vagabondish.com/be-a-better-blogger-by-breaking-your-wiki-ddiction/comment-page-1/#comment-235</link>
		<dc:creator>ianmack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:06:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vagabondish.com/be-a-better-blogger-by-breaking-your-wiki-ddiction/#comment-235</guid>
		<description>good point, linking to wikipedia can be seen as a bit lazy.  but on the other hand, it&#039;s currently a source of information that is (1) updated relatively regularly (2) generally accurate through crowd-sourcing.   A blogger may be a better writer, but has an bias of some kind.  If you&#039;re trying to send readers to a vivid description, link to a blogger.  But if you&#039;re just providing general background information, I&#039;d stick with the Wick.  (hey, i think i just invented a slang term for wikipedia.... ;-D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>good point, linking to wikipedia can be seen as a bit lazy.  but on the other hand, it&#8217;s currently a source of information that is (1) updated relatively regularly (2) generally accurate through crowd-sourcing.   A blogger may be a better writer, but has an bias of some kind.  If you&#8217;re trying to send readers to a vivid description, link to a blogger.  But if you&#8217;re just providing general background information, I&#8217;d stick with the Wick.  (hey, i think i just invented a slang term for wikipedia&#8230;. ;-D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
