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