Conservative in the sense that it contains significant information limited to
that derived from reliable sources.
Progressive, to the extent we can include information that is not that well
sourced but is derived from traditional sources or personal experience. For
example the Hopi creation
In good encyclopedic tradition, a reference to that quote in context, is
probably in order. Ziko, I suspect you got this quote from this 2010
chapter? https://reagle.org/joseph/2010/gfc/chapter-2.html
If I look at this post, he talks about progressivism in the context of
methodology and
Hi Ziko,
there is a long-standing problem of recentism. There are a lot of Wikipedia
articles which are only based on new sources (though reliable) and not on
serious academic literature. There are some which contain zero encyclopedic
information because they basically only retell the news
Dear fellows,
Some time ago, Joseph Reagle wrote that an encyclopedia must be
progressive. In my personal view, something "progressive" sounds to me
intuitively more sympathetic than something "conservative". But of course,
these are only two words loaden with meaning, and reality is always more
