undefined | Better HN

0 pointshoppyhoppy21d ago0 comments

Thank you for the update, Cliff. I will update your Wikipedia page to show that your death is currently under dispute.

0 comments

I've gone out of my way to not read my wikipedia page. Beyond this, there's a rule (suggestion??) that you not edit your own biographical page.

As a result, I have no idea whether things are right, wrong, misguided, or kflooey on that page. Anyone who wants to know details can simply stop over here for coffee and a chat.

Cheers, -Cliff

croemer1d ago

You can suggest changes on the talk page.

> Wikipedia provides a structured process for subjects to suggest changes without directly editing articles. The mechanism centers on the article's "talk page", a discussion area attached to every Wikipedia entry where editors coordinate improvements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editing_a_page_about...

CliffStoll1d ago

Aah - thank you. Maybe I'll check it out. When I have free time. Uh right... Cheers, -Cliff

sokoloff1d ago

Classic Wikipedia. “I spoke with Cliff today; now I have to go discuss on the Talk page whether or not he’s dead.”

Rebelgecko1d ago

No original research please

pngwen1d ago

Ah, but we could cite Cliff's Facebook page as evidence that he is disputing the reports of his own death. That's at least strong enough to put his earthly existence in the "debatable" column.

1 more reply

tptacek1d ago

You laugh, but it's a real problem. In this case: a WP claim that Stoll was dead would quickly fall to the lack of reliable sources indicating his death; naturally, there's a WP policy for this.

throwup2381d ago

They’re now arguing about whether the talk page counts as a secondary source.

KingFelix1d ago

Sounds a bit like a Philip K Dick story

ignoramous1d ago

For living persons, Wikipedia takes misleading / contentious material quite seriously: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_livin...

That said, Wikipedia is pretty unapologetic about its preference for verifiability, not truth: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability,_not_t...

zeusdclxvi1d ago

No reliable secondary sources that you are still alive I'm afraid

1 more reply

ClikeX1d ago

They did add nuance to that quote a long time ago. It's a good stance, it's fine if someone knows something to be true. But other visitors of Wikipedia don't know that, so anything that's added without a source is questionable.

gjm111d ago

In case anyone is taking this subthread too seriously: C.S.'s Wikipedia page does not in fact claim that he is dead, and its most recent update was in December 2025. Whatever rumours of his death may be circulating, they do not appear to have infected Wikipedia.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

CliffStoll1d ago

I've gone out of my way to not read my wikipedia page. Beyond this, there's a rule (suggestion??) that you not edit your own biographical page.

As a result, I have no idea whether things are right, wrong, misguided, or kflooey on that page. Anyone who wants to know details can simply stop over here for coffee and a chat.

Cheers, -Cliff

croemer1d ago

You can suggest changes on the talk page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editing_a_page_about...

CliffStoll1d ago

Aah - thank you. Maybe I'll check it out. When I have free time. Uh right... Cheers, -Cliff

sokoloff1d ago

Classic Wikipedia. “I spoke with Cliff today; now I have to go discuss on the Talk page whether or not he’s dead.”

Rebelgecko1d ago

No original research please

pngwen1d ago

Ah, but we could cite Cliff's Facebook page as evidence that he is disputing the reports of his own death. That's at least strong enough to put his earthly existence in the "debatable" column.

1 more reply

tptacek1d ago

You laugh, but it's a real problem. In this case: a WP claim that Stoll was dead would quickly fall to the lack of reliable sources indicating his death; naturally, there's a WP policy for this.

throwup2381d ago

They’re now arguing about whether the talk page counts as a secondary source.

KingFelix1d ago

Sounds a bit like a Philip K Dick story

ignoramous1d ago

For living persons, Wikipedia takes misleading / contentious material quite seriously: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_livin...

That said, Wikipedia is pretty unapologetic about its preference for verifiability, not truth: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability,_not_t...

zeusdclxvi1d ago

No reliable secondary sources that you are still alive I'm afraid

1 more reply

ClikeX1d ago

gjm111d ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse