3 ms·
"torrent of pointless, trivial content that readers have to sift through to find the real stuff" I don't think people page through online encyclopedias that wa
by Steko 13y ago
"torrent of pointless, trivial content that readers have to sift through to find the real stuff"
I don't think people page through online encyclopedias that way. I'm not notable, if I had a wikipedia page I don't think it would link from any page that actually exists today. How could that ever bother you? I don't think you'd come across it unless you googled my name and it took you to my wikipedia page in which case it would seem to be doing good.
- DanBC 13y agoI used to hit the [random] link and know I'd get something interesting. Now, not so much. I'll get a tiny stub of something programmaticly dragged in from some huge database - a town name with maybe some population figure and location; an obscure politician with party affiliation and birthdate. For people who enjoy gnoming these kind of articles are tedious - what's the point of correcting a comma if no-one is likely to see it?
- Steko 13y agoHow hard would it be to reprogram the random button to only hit pages in the top X00,000 or with at least Y words?
- saraid216 13y agoSupporting the random button isn't what I'd call anywhere near the top 10 most important functions an encyclopedia of any kind ought to provide. Serendipity is useful in a library or a bookstore, but when you open a book, the bibliomancy becomes avant garde art at best.