Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2005-11-07 (06:44)
From: Tony Edgin <edgin@s...>
Subject: RE: [Caml-list] Wikipedia

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:caml-list-
>] On Behalf Of Thomas Fischbacher
> Sent: Monday, 7 November 2005 8:33 a.m.
> To: Jon Harrop
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Wikipedia
> On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, Jon Harrop wrote:
> ...and once again, it may be interesting to see a bit more context.
> >
> >
> > 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
> > nic "tf" and all of my corrections were removed by Mike Lin. My code
> examples
> > remain though.
> On Oct 26, 19:10, I put a note into the "talk" section of the OCaml
> wikipedia article, pointing out that it contained an excessively large
> amount of links to, which were indeed entered by Jon
> Harrop, by now infamous also on Usenet.
> ge&oldid=26550471
> To give an excerpt from the article as it was at that time:
> Please note the number of links:

I really don't see the issue here.  Yep.  He posted several examples hosted
on his own server and referenced his own book.  It would have been
significantly more work for him to dig up and test links to examples he
didn't produce.  If more people would contribute, the diversity of websites
reference would increase, and the density of FFConsultancy links would
decrease.  Maybe this should be a call for other contributors to aid his
wikipedia work instead of an attack on him attempting to improve the
wikipedia article.