I get this feeling sometimes that some people are more interested in 
building a "community" on Wikipedia rather than helping to construct an 
encyclopedia. I tend to think that there is a notion which existed upon 
Wikipedia's founding:

"Always leave something undone. Whenever you write a page, never finish 
it. Always leave something obvious to do: an uncompleted sentence, a 
question in the text (with a not-too-obscure answer someone can supply), 
wikied links that are of interest, requests for help from specific other 
Wikipedians, the beginning of a provocative argument that someone simply 
must fill in, etc. The purpose of this rule is to encourage others to 
keep working on the wiki."

I say this is not readily followed anymore, and I personally disagree 
with that tenet, because of the sheer volume of the English Wikipedia 
(almost 3.5 million articles) that will always have some sort of 
positive article creation rate due to developing and new events that 
occur worldwide all the time.

Anyways, I think the reason why we had something like that in there is 
so that we could preserve or expand this "community" of editors. 
However, that implies that a certain level of drama should always exist, 
not to mention that perfection is near-impossible to achieve (though I'm 
sure many of us strive to do the best we can to improve the 
encyclopedia), and that one's interpretation of an article or topic 
being "complete" varies.

That comes to my question regarding whether or not we are here to build 
an online community or an online encyclopedia. Should we focus outwards 
toward the reading/viewing audience, or should we focus inwards towards 
the editors?

-MuZemike

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply via email to