"One (and not the most important) pieces of evidence for Wikipedia being in
a failed state is precisely that
it does not, by the community's own admission, constitute a reliable source
"

You have made this argument more than once. That might be a piece of
evidence seems both wrong and not relevant to the sense in which people
here as saying WP has failed, which is as a welcoming, "safe" environment
for contributors and would-be contributors.

It is good policy to make sure that contributors reach out to other
sources, even when one believes that Wikipedia is as reliable as the
average tertiary source we allow as a reference. It prevents us from
relying exclusively on what can easily turn out to be a very narrow set of
points of view.  Does/did the Encyclopedia Britanica cite other EB articles
as references rather than include them as "see alsos"?

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 8:27 AM Mister Thrapostibongles <
thrapostibong...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Vito
>
> This rather tends to support my point.  One (and not the most important)
> pieces of evidence for Wikipedia being in a failed state is precisely that
> it does not , by the community's own admission, constitute a reliable
> source:whereas "Reputable tertiary sources
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:TERTIARY>, such as
> introductory-level university textbooks, almanacs, and encyclopedias, may
> be cited".  So Wikipedia fails in its aim of being an encyclopaedia on one
> of the most important tests one could imagine, namely reliability.  And a
> reason for that is its lack of effective content management policies and
> mechanisms to put them into effect (in the old days we called that being an
> editor, but that word on Wikipedia now is more or less a redundant synonym
> for contributor).
>
> Now suppose that Wikipedia had effective editorial policies and processes
> that allowed it to assume the status of a reliable source, just like the
> encyclopaedia it aims to be.  You say that even in that situation, it would
> be easy to manipulate.  On that assumption, how much easier it must be to
> "trick" it today when it has no such effective policies and processes in
> place!
>
> Thrapostibongles
>
>
>

-- 
Dennis C. During
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to