Wikipedia's destiny

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
226 messages Options
1 ... 9101112
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wikipedia's destiny

The Cunctator
On 2/28/06, John Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The Cunctator wrote:
> >On 2/28/06, Steve Bennett <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>On 2/28/06, The Cunctator <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>On 2/21/06, Mark Gallagher <[hidden email]>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>>We were just discussing that ... Wikipedia *doesn't* want to be
> >>>>"the free encyclopaedia that anyone can edit".  There's too much
> >>>>abuse, too much ranting from trolls with a sense of
> >>>>self-entitlement, encouraged by that tagline.
> >>>>
> >>>>I quite like the idea of "Welcome to Wikipedia, where good authors
> >>>>are always welcome".
> >>>Funny, I never realized you were the One True Prophet through whom
> >>>Wikipedia speaks.
> >>>
> >>>(Because you're not.)
> >>That was uncalled for, you know. We're all entitled to express our
> >>view of what Wikipedia is or should become, and all entitled to
> >>attempt to interpret the will of "the community".
> >You're right. I'm sorry.
> >
> >But I think that Mark Gallagher's approach is dangerously wrong.
> >Restricting Wikipedia to "good" people smacks of Animal-Farm-esque
> >groupthink.
> >
> >That attitude gives "our enemies" way too much attention and credit.
> >
> >It creates way too much of an us-vs.-them paradigm which I've fought
> >against from day one.
> >
> >And Wikipedia doesn't like that.
> >
> >
> [[WP:NOT]] a social experiment. We're not here to see if trolls or "bad"
> people can be rehabilitated. We're here to write an encyclopedia, and
> anyone more interested in doing "bad" things can go busy themselves on
> any of the millions of other websites on the internet. While I dislike
> us vs them dichotomies as much as the next fellow, I can certainly bear
> those acting in good faith vs those acting in bad faith.

Technically, Wikipedia is a social experiment. It's not the goal of
the project, but the project is certainly an experiement in
Internet-based collaboration.

We're not here to define "bad" people, either.

Our welcome message should not assume bad faith, is my only point.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wikipedia's destiny

grm_wnr
In reply to this post by Ben Lowe
Ben Lowe wrote:
> I will be writing a Tony-award-winning musical about Brian Peppers within
> the next year entitled "0.5 + 0.5 = My Heart: The Brian Peppers Story".  I
> will then petition Jimbo to unblock the page.
>
> That, my friends, is *bold*.
>
>  
No, it's disruption of Broadway in order to make a point. ;)

grm_wnr
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wikipedia's destiny

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Steve Bennett-4
Steve Bennett wrote:

>On 2/28/06, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>
>>I often drift in and out of attention when the radio is playing in the
>>background.  Mention of Wikipedia grabs my attention.  It was
>>interesting to hear a commentater remark that in the light of some
>>recent scandals over science that had been published in peer reviewed
>>journals something like Wikipedia might be a better avenue for peer
>>review than the existing system.  Many of these journals operate on  a
>>tight budget.  They may require their authors to maintain raw
>>experimental data for authentication, but in reality most of these
>>journals do not have the resources needed to properly audit submissions.
>>Repeating experiments may be costly, and if the author and his
>>institution have the research tied up in patents repeating them would
>>not be cost effective either when the auditor can have no return on his
>>investment.
>>    
>>
>Meanwhile, my girlfriend was recently told by the third different
>lecturer at university "please do not use Wikipedia as a source" :)
>Apparently these days a large number of students are citing Wikipedia,
>because it's there, and it's so easy.
>
To an extent they are right for the wrong reasons.  Would the lecturers
have told her not to use Britannica?  What students should learn right
away in a short course at the beginning of a university career is how to
evaluate resources.  Better still such a course should reiinforce things
that are better learned much earlier.  How much she can push the
boundary may depend on her personality, and how open-minded the
lecturers are.

Ec

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wikipedia's destiny

Tony Sidaway-3
On 2/28/06, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> To an extent they are right for the wrong reasons.  Would the lecturers
> have told her not to use Britannica?  What students should learn right
> away in a short course at the beginning of a university career is how to
> evaluate resources.  Better still such a course should reiinforce things
> that are better learned much earlier.  How much she can push the
> boundary may depend on her personality, and how open-minded the
> lecturers are.

I think I would have been shot if I had ever referred to Britannica.
I had a whole university library available to me, and no excuse to
skimp.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wikipedia's destiny

Stan Shebs
Tony Sidaway wrote:

>On 2/28/06, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>To an extent they are right for the wrong reasons.  Would the lecturers
>>have told her not to use Britannica?  What students should learn right
>>away in a short course at the beginning of a university career is how to
>>evaluate resources.  Better still such a course should reiinforce things
>>that are better learned much earlier.  How much she can push the
>>boundary may depend on her personality, and how open-minded the
>>lecturers are.
>>
>
>I think I would have been shot if I had ever referred to Britannica.
>I had a whole university library available to me, and no excuse to
>skimp.
>
I suppose it's a comment on the sad state of education that the instructor
even felt the need to tell students that encyclopedias are not appropriate
sources. That was made clear to me in the first semester of high school -
refer to an encyclopedia for background if you want, but never ever cite
it in papers.

Stan

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wikipedia's destiny

Peter Mackay
In reply to this post by The Cunctator
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of The Cunctator
>
> But I think that Mark Gallagher's approach is dangerously wrong.
> Restricting Wikipedia to "good" people smacks of
> Animal-Farm-esque groupthink.

Some of the "good people" just aren't that good. In many cases, whether you
are seen as good or not depends more on *who* says you are good than on any
intrinsic standard of goodness.

Peter, doubleplus


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
1 ... 9101112