Back in 1989-90 I was working in a telecom company. We then said mobile
phones can never really challange fixed phone as it is not at all
reliable compared with fixed phone and will never be of the same
quality. We then learnt
"reliable enough for the purpose it it used for" as an explanation for
the explosive use of mobiles for almost all usages
I use to to say Wikipedia consists of a number, say 1000, encyclopedias
on different subject areas.
And I would say for something like 80% of these wp is reliable enough
and in many cases outstanding compared to "competitors". In many subject
areas there does not even exist an alternative.
But in some areas, say 20% of total there exist good alternatives if we
look at content, and in some cases (like health) I see the demand for
reliability and quality so high that perhaps wp can not be seen as the
best alternative. (and the "Hot line" still rely on the fixed phone...)
I am proud to (again) be part of a movement that "wins" the world by
producing "products" that are being reliable enough for its purpose at
the same time being extremely easy to access and useful
Anders
Anthony Cole skrev den 2015-04-07 19:16:
It's an encyclopedia, Marc. The world's encyclopedia. People should be able
to trust it. You and the rest of the WMF need to get that through your
heads or you'll wake up one morning soon and find Wikipedia on page 2 of
Google and you out of a job. This is the most important issue facing
Wikipedia. Denial isn't helping.
Anthony Cole <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthonyhcole>
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 1:04 AM, Marc A. Pelletier <m...@uberbox.org> wrote:
On 15-04-07 12:51 PM, Anthony Cole wrote:
Wikipedia
should not be trusted for anything - least of all health matters .
That's a perfectly true, but perfectly vacuous assertion. Wikipedia
should be trusted exactly as much as any other single source may be
trusted, for exactly the same reason. Striving to find the most
reliable sources is fraught with pitfalls whether you attempt do to it
yourself or rely on the collective efforts of Wikipedia editors to do so.
Wikipedia is a giant collection of summaries and overview of topics, and
it never pretendend to be anything else. If you *end* your reasearch
there for anything of importance, then you commit as sin no graver (nor
lighter) than picking any other random book on the topic and ending your
research there.
-- Marc
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
