On 18 April 2010 21:10, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
I think how much people use something is a reasonable measure of how
useful it is. Maybe it is only useful for entertaining people or
useful for satisfying idle curiosity, but that is still a use. Perhaps
you mean how useful
Thomas Dalton wrote:
On 18 April 2010 22:25, The Cunctator cuncta...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, we do know, because Citizendium is just a retread of Nupedia,
which wasn't going anywhere.
Nupedia was supposed to be experts writing articles. Citizendium is
(in theory) anyone writing
On 19 April 2010 09:07, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
On 18 April 2010 22:25, The Cunctator cuncta...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, we do know, because Citizendium is just a retread of Nupedia,
which wasn't going anywhere.
Nupedia was supposed to
Thomas Dalton wrote:
You are aware that Nupedia wasn't a wiki, right?
Certainly - I've even read the book I co-authored which mentions this
fact. The point I was trying to make is more like if you bolt a
community like a wiki onto Nupedia-like processes, you can expect a sort
of social
Hi everyone,
The next strategic planning office hours are:
Tuesday, 20 April, from 20:00-21:00 UTC, which is:
-Tuesday (1-2pm PDT)
-Tuesday (4-5pm EDT)
Office hours will be a great opportunity to discuss the work that's
happened as well as the work to come.
As always, you can access the
I hope that the following will help to provide a littler more clarity. I
have listed those articles that clearly failed and those that were
borderline along with a brief summation of some of the most significant
points raised by the reviewers.
Clear failure:
1) Max Weber: The reviewer wrote that
On 18 April 2010 23:02, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
Of course, change all this and they still likely would have never supplanted
Wikipedia. Some sort of Wikiversity-like mission statement would have
probably been more achievable.
Heh. Wonder if they would have gone for a bunch of
On 19 April 2010 17:52, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 April 2010 23:02, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
Of course, change all this and they still likely would have never supplanted
Wikipedia. Some sort of Wikiversity-like mission statement would have
probably been more
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 2:50 PM, David Lindsey dvdln...@gmail.com wrote:
5) Alzheimer's Disease: The reviewer found that there are a number of
areas where there is little discussion about important aspects of the
disease while other areas were (relatively) over-discussed and noted a
variety
On 19 April 2010 18:46, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder if there might be a subtle bias playing into these reviews.
Perhaps if reviewers begin with the assumption that the article was
written by amateur hobbyists, that influences the outcome. If Lindsey
went back to them and let them
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 2:30 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 April 2010 18:46, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder if there might be a subtle bias playing into these reviews.
Perhaps if reviewers begin with the assumption that the article was
written by amateur hobbyists,
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 April 2010 20:47, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't agree. It's better you admit you can't measure the thing you
want to talk about rather than passing off the measurement you can
make as
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:50 AM, David Lindsey dvdln...@gmail.com wrote:
I hope that the following will help to provide a littler more clarity. I
have listed those articles that clearly failed and those that were
borderline along with a brief summation of some of the most significant
points
On 19/04/2010, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Wait: high school students aren't our audience? I think one thing that
causes a lot of confusion about Wikipedia is we have no clear audience
-- the general assumption has been that we're writing for the educated
layperson; I'd take that
The Craig in Craigslist.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/newmark/detail??blogid=67entry_id=61605
http://www.cnewmark.com/2010/04/a-little-customer-service-for-wikipedia-bios-.html
This is good, actually, as it's making the news. As such, it will
bring to people's attention that there are
15 matches
Mail list logo
