On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Carl (CBM) <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip> > I would be much more interested in a system for expert refereeing than > the present FA system. To some extent, the current "peer review" > process can already be used for this, but I don't expect to see a real > change in this direction until the successor to Wikipedia. I've always thought it strange that there is no real established process for allowing submission of external peer reviews. There are many articles where there are experts in the topic in question who are quite approachable and could be asked to review the article. I suspect this is not done so much for two reasons: 1) Sometimes the primary editor, editing pseudonymously, will themselves be an expert in the field in question, and such approaches could end up being awkward (I don't think this is a good enough reason to avoid external reviews). 2) Sometimes the article will be savaged by external reviewers who will know more about the breadth and depth of available sources, and will (in many cases correctly) point out that the article (although superficially good at first glance) doesn't really use the right sources, or the existing sources in the right way. 3) Some external reviewers would fail to get what the article should be aiming for, and will end up suggesting that the article is weighted one way or another, and big arguments would ensue. Of course, external reviews would massively improve the quality of some articles, and would help identify the articles that were genuinely our best work, but the problems above would need to be addressed first. Carcharoth _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
