Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 9:18 PM, Steve Summit wrote: > Heebie wrote: >> ...The article is fundamentally flawed - you can see it contradicts >> itself with no other knowledge or figures to hand. >> >> They say that "The bulk of Wikipedia is written by

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

Heebie wrote: > ...The article is fundamentally flawed - you can see it contradicts > itself with no other knowledge or figures to hand. > > They say that "The bulk of Wikipedia is written by 1400 obsessed freaks > who do little else but contribute to the site", but then go on to say > that "The bu

Re: [WikiEN-l] (Off Topic) Re: Biography of Living persons

<> And who sets this incredibly high bar of "morality" ? And whose morals? And who chooses? And who decides that we must be archangels and views the rest of journalism and publishing as moral demons? That isn't the project for which I volunteered. The project for which I volunteered is th

Re: [WikiEN-l] NOR contradicts NPOV

<> --- Our policy was fashioned in a deliberate way to prevent the use of primary sources where there is no secondary source mention. That was deliberate. Will Johnson **New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.a

Re: [WikiEN-l] NOR contradicts NPOV

In a message dated 1/2/2009 2:51:07 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, arrom...@rahul.net writes: On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 wjhon...@aol.com wrote: > But, we do not *want* primary sources to be summarized unless they have > already been commented upon in secondary sources. "Summarizing" isn't the same th

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Steve Summit wrote: > Phil wrote: >> This should be required reading... The sense that our inclusion and >> notability policies put us at odds with readers who are not major >> parts of the community has always been there, but this troublingly >> nails it: the popu

Re: [WikiEN-l] (Off Topic) Re: Biography of Living persons

On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 7:37 AM, Fred Bauder wrote: >> toddmallen wrote: >> >>> People are readily identifiable by the information given about them >>> anyway. How hard is it to find the Star Wars kid's name, even from our >>> article, where all the sources we use readily publish it, or a google >>

Re: [WikiEN-l] (Off Topic) Re: Biography of Living persons

On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 6:40 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: > toddmallen wrote: > >> People are readily identifiable by the information given about them >> anyway. How hard is it to find the Star Wars kid's name, even from our >> article, where all the sources we use readily publish it, or a goog

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

Heebie wrote: > So it seems to me that Swartz's work backs-up Wikipedia as being a > truly crowd-sourced project, and only goes against Wales' original > remarks, which were a bit worrying in the first place. Or am I getting > the wrong end of the stick here? A two-layer model of how content evo

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

Personally, I don't see what all the fuss is about. The article is fundamentally flawed - you can see it contradicts itself with no other knowledge or figures to hand. They say that "The bulk of Wikipedia is written by 1400 obsessed freaks who do little else but contribute to the site", but then g

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

2009/1/3 Charles Matthews : > I think that is "could be", not "ought to be". The mission is not to > maximise readership: as of early 2009, it still to "write the > encyclopedia". You know, the old Wikipedia some of us have thought we > are writing for a few years now. > > As usual, there is the a

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

Steve Summit wrote: > Inclusion and notability policies > ought to be based neither on what an anonymous contributor is > interesting in writing, nor what a self-appointed policy wonk > deems "notable" or "encyclopedic", but rather, on what some > nontrivial numbers of our readers are interested i

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

Phil wrote: > This should be required reading... The sense that our inclusion and > notability policies put us at odds with readers who are not major > parts of the community has always been there, but this troublingly > nails it: the population of people who write articles and people who > delete

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

2009/1/3 Steve Summit : > A recent recycling of Aaron Swartz's analysis of the difference > between who-makes-the-most-edits, versus who-contributes-the-most-content: > > > As often is the case, the last paragraph is

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

On Jan 3, 2009, at 11:39 AM, geni wrote: > 2009/1/3 Phil Sandifer : >> This should be required reading - it completely upends fundamental >> assumptions about our content, and has huge implications for things >> like deletion. The sense that our inclusion and notability policies >> put us at odds

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

2009/1/3 Phil Sandifer : > This should be required reading - it completely upends fundamental > assumptions about our content, and has huge implications for things > like deletion. The sense that our inclusion and notability policies > put us at odds with readers who are not major parts of the comm

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

This should be required reading - it completely upends fundamental assumptions about our content, and has huge implications for things like deletion. The sense that our inclusion and notability policies put us at odds with readers who are not major parts of the community has always been the

[WikiEN-l] "Who The Hell Writes Wikipedia, Anyway?"

A recent recycling of Aaron Swartz's analysis of the difference between who-makes-the-most-edits, versus who-contributes-the-most-content: I think we all know the real story, but it's fascinating how much traction

Re: [WikiEN-l] (Off Topic) Re: Biography of Living persons

> toddmallen wrote: > >> People are readily identifiable by the information given about them >> anyway. How hard is it to find the Star Wars kid's name, even from our >> article, where all the sources we use readily publish it, or a google >> search on the article title brings it right up? If somet

[WikiEN-l] (Off Topic) Re: Biography of Living persons

toddmallen wrote: > People are readily identifiable by the information given about them > anyway. How hard is it to find the Star Wars kid's name, even from our > article, where all the sources we use readily publish it, or a google > search on the article title brings it right up? If something is