>> Took approximately 10 minutes, in fact. Which makes it all the more
>> surprising that I happened to hit the page within that 10-minute window.
>
> It happens. I once tried to read the article on the first Halo game, and one
> section, quite a large paragraph, consisted entirely of the phrase 'halo is gay'
> in block capitals over and over again. Several minutes later, back to normal.

Subtle. Real subtle.

Of course, one does not have to *utter* the words "Halo is gay". This 
fact is self-evident, uttered or not. ;-)

>> Of course, if instead of inserting something obviously bogus, the person
>> had made several small factual edits which look superficially plausible,
>> you could slowly pollute large sections of Wikipedia with false data and
>> nobody would notice for a very long time.
>
> Except that there's a large army of editors who get notified of every edit, and
> likely catch even subtle changes relatively quickly.

You would have to be careful to not just indiscriminately edit dozens of 
unrelated articles changing dates and so forth. That would be a tad 
obvious. But if your edits were of low frequency, it's unlikely that 
anybody would bother to look up every single fact you changed to make 
sure it was correct.

OTOH, I gather that if you try to make /genuine/ corrections, your edits 
get automatically reverted, so... :-P

> Still funny when you happen to catch some vandalism in the act tho :)

Yeah, well... not so much.

> And then there's always the anti-Wikipedia:
> http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page

My brain! Urrrgh!! >_<

Post a reply to this message