Showing posts with label Wikipedia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Wikipedia. Show all posts

Saturday, 17 March 2012

Encyclopedic Math(s)

Jeff Haden's reflective piece, 5 Things You Should Say to Your Colleagues Today, aims to make the workplace a more encouraging place for people to be. With a bit of creative licence, the ideas he presents reduce to the following equations:
  • praise them < (praise them) ^ retrospectively
  • help me = indirect praise
  • say sorry = sorry + why - but
  • help them = (time free + offer help) · (collaborative - patronizing)
First ideas
  • Write mathematical summary of a text
  • Sideways entry to covering mathematical symbols
  • Venn sort logic & algebra symbols
  • Building stages of interaction patterns
  • For logical & abstract learners
  • Offbeat summary technique
  • Differentiated task for FFs
  • Use with big data scientists
Basic maths symbols
basic maths symbols
Basic Maths Symbols at rapidtables.com

Newsflash
Quickly read Encyclopedia Britannica to stop printing books. Which of the following are true? Discuss.
  • Encyclopedia Brittanica > Wikipedia
  • Wikipedia ≠ Encyclopedia Britannica
  • Encyclopedia Brittanica = fact
  • Wikipedia = fiction

Wednesday, 2 September 2009

Wikipedia - trust, consensus, fact

extract from Wikipedia to Color Code Untrustworthy Text in Wired Science
 drawing on the original feature by Hadley Legatt in Science Notes
... Text from questionable sources starts out with a bright orange background, while text from trusted authors gets a lighter shade. As more people view and edit the new text, it gradually gains more “trust” and turns from orange to white.

“They’ve hit on the fundamentally Darwinian nature of Wikipedia,” said Wikipedia software developer and neuroscientist Virgil Griffith of the California Institute of Technology, who was not involved in the project. “Everyone’s injecting random crap into Wikipedia, and what people agree with more often sticks around. Crap that people don’t like goes away.” ...