Hello people, thanks for the reactions!
I actually did not mean conservative in a strict political sense, and I am
a big fan of Reagle's book. It seems to me
that some people in the movement identify strongly with the (political)
term "progressive", and, depending on their personal
circumstances,
Most people in the world (or at least in the U.S.) use the terms
"conservative" and "progressive" when talking about politics, and associate
them with bundles of viewpoints on society, economics, religion, and so on.
The political aspect is partly relevant to Wikipedia, too, but if we just
take
Message -
From: Ziko van Dijk
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Sent: Wed, 27 May 2020 09:36:20 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] An encyclopedia must be conservative (?)
Dear fellows,
Some time ago, Joseph Reagle wrote that an encyclopedia must be
progressive. In my personal view, something
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
