This isn't on-topic for the list, and may even qualify as a troll, but I
think your experiences point to another fundamental deficiency of the
wikipedia. Why do you think that others will have more success in their
updates than you have?


-Kip

On 11/3/05, Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:
>
>
> Wikipedia is a large, famous, on-line, reader-editable encyclopaedia with
> a
> page dedicated to OCaml:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocaml
>
> The page gets a lot of hits and is, most likely, the first port of call by
> many people when trying to learn about OCaml.
>
> Unfortunately, the quality of this page is substantially worse than that
> of
> the equivalent pages on SML, Haskell and so on. I have tried to improve
> the
> page myself but most of my links have been removed following complaints to
> admim by an anonymous, German-speaking, OCaml-using physicist with the IRC
> nic "tf" and all of my corrections were removed by Mike Lin. My code
> examples
> remain though.
>
> So if anyone out there has a little spare time and wants to do something
> productive, please try to improve this page.
>
> --
> Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
> Objective CAML for Scientists
> http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists
>
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
>