# The Straight Dope in Wikipedia

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-straight-dope-in-wikipedia/257323>\
**Category:** Cafe Society\
**Created:** [July 28, 2004, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-straight-dope-in-wikipedia/257323 "2004-07-28T21:03:23Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Chunky\_Bum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9dc877/32.png) [@Chunky\_Bum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chunky_Bum)\
**Post date:** [July 28, 2004, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-straight-dope-in-wikipedia/257323/1 "2004-07-28T21:03:23Z")

</div>

I have no idea where this post should go. If it needs to be moved, please do so.

The content regarding _The Straight Dope_ in **Wikipedia** is pretty [thin](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Straight_Dope).

Anyone up for adding some content? Information regarding the SDMB would be a nice addition. How about some _teemings_ info? _The Straight Dope_ books?

I would write some myself, but I am a horrible writer. Plus, I am only a guest on the boards.

Who wants to step up to the plate?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\
**Post date:** [July 28, 2004, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-straight-dope-in-wikipedia/257323/2 "2004-07-28T21:13:16Z")

</div>

Thin, and wrong! Cecil, a fictional character? Bah!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Kantalooppi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/a5b964/32.png) [@Kantalooppi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kantalooppi)\
**Post date:** [July 28, 2004, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-straight-dope-in-wikipedia/257323/3 "2004-07-28T21:18:01Z")

</div>

For inspiration, [Something Awful has a fairly good writeup.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Something_Awful)

The thing I love about Wikipedia is that it covers things like Internet culture fairly well. I mean, in what traditional dictionary would you have a writeup about [The Best Page On The Internet?](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maddox)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Shade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2bfe46/32.png) [@Shade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shade)\
**Post date:** [July 28, 2004, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-straight-dope-in-wikipedia/257323/4 "2004-07-28T23:28:08Z")

</div>

> [@Ethilrist](#):
>
> Thin, and wrong! Cecil, a fictional character? Bah!

Eh? Has it been changed? Today it reads “There are urban legends concerning Adams himself, namely whether “Cecil Adams” is a fictional character or the nom de plume of various other authors, as there are few details known about this secretive figure. His assistant, Ed Zotti, answers few questions about Cecil’s true nature.” which is exactly true: wikipedia prides itself on only making unarguable “neutral point-of-view” articles. We might think we know Cecil is a real unique person, but it’s true that there are no almost details and no evidence, so for or against are all basically hearsay. It’s easy enough to add an explanation if we want 😉

It might be nice to add some choice quotes from a column or two to give the flavour. It gives all that’s necessary, but impressing us would be nice.