> But I do not believe that experts should have any special powers in > the editing of articles. > > Rather, I think they should be encouraged to act in a pure review > capacity, assessing the existing work of Wikipedians, and making > recommendations for improvement. This might also be partially > implemented through flagged revs, and I could also envision a type of > button at the top of articles that says "see last version assessed by > an expert". >
My point is actually that for majority of articles on science-ralated (and possibly some article on humanity-related, here I understand the situation less) there is nothing to review - they are either stubs or non-existent. Somebody needs to write them. You can consider this as a kind of review if you wish. Cheers Yaroslav _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
