We MUST make corrections as soon as possible. Authors of scholarly
papers and books do/should do this s.a.p. We have the advantage over
book authors that we don't have to wait until the next edition. The
point about controversial subjects is a good one, but as I've said
before, CZ ought to concentrate on controversial subjects. Wikipedia
is good enough for factual articles (give or take articles on drugs
written by the manufacturers!).
Corrections, including the insertion of a newly-discovered opposing
view, could be put in the text, indented, with a footnote "Updated 1
April 2008 - see indented section(s)".
Who does this? The original author, to whom corrections should be sent,
copy to the subject editor for info. - or something like that. It's a
precaution as well as a courtesy, to involve the original author if
available.
If we can formulate a policy and publicize it, it will give us more
Brownie points re Wikipedia.
Peter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Citizendium-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l
