Bad information drives out good or how much can we trust Wikipedia?
Quoting: Bad information drives out good or how much can we trust Wikipedia? – LabPlot —
You might already know this, but finalizing a release for a project with the complexity and scope like that of LabPlot can be hard and exhausting. After our latest recent 2.11 release, we decided to take a short break and distance ourselves from coding and take care of other non-coding related tasks, like discussions around the NLnet grant for LabPlot, our ongoing GSoC projects, the roadmap for the next release, improving our documentation, the gallery on the homepage and the article about LabPlot on Wikipedia. Don’t worry, we’re already back to coding and working on new features for the next release 🙂
The article about LabPlot on Wikipedia (we are talking about the ‘EN’ version here, but the situation is similar for other languages) was completely outdated and still containing the information about LabPlot1 from Qt3/KDE3 times. The article became largely wrong with the introduction of LabPlot2 and with further developments in recent years. Among other things, the feature set described on Wikipedia was very far from being correct and complete in comparison to the description for other applications of its type.
The current situation was clear for us and it was also evident what needed to be done. Let’s go ahead and improve the article, we thought. Hey! Being able to contribute and to share your knowledge with everybody is the advantage of Wikipedia, right? Easier said than done…