As likely known here to members of the list, there is a free encyclopedia called "Wikipedia" on the internet, which is an open public website that is virtually not censored or policed. It has several entries on architecture that seem to be informative, if not fully complete and accurate. It is of course merely one source of research in seeking the viability of theorizing the field. My curiosity is whether it should even be consulted in regard to serious inquiries. Due to its ungoverned accessibility, it is likely that learned scholars who covet their cherished ideas might consider withholding pertinent submissions. The problems of trademark and copyright and ownership are obvious deterrents to participation. This observation of mine also likely goes to the missed opportunity of the internet, in that it still fails to be a sound and secure archive for websites. In any event, it is not clear to me in what regard this source is held by architectural experts. Incidentally, the entries on semiotics and those related to the topic of signs seem to be adequate and reliable, but should nonetheless be approached with some degree of caution.
-Frances
