Page 1 of 1

Shads on Wikipedia

PostPosted: 21 Jan 2015, 21:47
by howarddobson
Hello everyone

Looking on the Shads page on Wikipedia, which I've updated a couple of times, I thought that it doesn't really reflect their success properly on the discography page.

They must have had a lot of hits around the world that are not reflected on the page.

If the page could include more territories for singles and albums it would be a truer reflection of how they conquered most of the world :)

I might add a couple of territories.

Howard

Re: Shads on Wikipedia

PostPosted: 22 Jan 2015, 00:06
by Iain Purdon
Wikipedia's strength is also its weakness. Its strength is that Shads experts like us (!) can write the purest of truth into it. Its weakness is that other people can then change everything we've written in favour of their own half-baked, agenda-fuelled rantings.
Write what you like. Just don't expect it to be there next month :)

Re: Shads on Wikipedia

PostPosted: 22 Jan 2015, 09:13
by noelford
Too true. I corrected an entry on Duane Eddy's page in the discography. The B side of Cannonball, Mason Dixon Lion (a pun on Mason Dixon Line) had been written using 'Line' instead of 'Lion'. I just checked and somebody had changed it back to the incorrect title. I've changed it again, now, but...

Re: Shads on Wikipedia

PostPosted: 22 Jan 2015, 12:53
by bor64
A while back, I read on a Wikipedia page Hank used Kramer guitars.....it's gone now, but there's the proof every "weirdo" can write what he wants on wiki.

Cheers Rob

Re: Shads on Wikipedia

PostPosted: 11 Feb 2015, 21:37
by Monty
one guy once told me (on another forum) how he corrected a wrong date of birth of a pop artist to the correct date - within five minutes it was put back to the wrong date !

after a few attempts he gave up - he got nowhere trying to reason with the editor(s) !

Re: Shads on Wikipedia

PostPosted: 11 Feb 2015, 22:58
by Iain Purdon
WIkipedia is well-known as the resource of the lazy journalist. It's a great thing but without corroboration from a reliable independent source it cannot be relied on.