Hi all, Personally, I now consider myself a critic of Wikipedia, and I no longer support the project. (Do not take this to mean, however, that I do not support the wiki model or some sectors of Wikipedia; I do.) The article written in AHES, though, seemed inaccurate on a few points—most obviously, perhaps, the statement that "[certain controversial pages will need to be] ... scrutinised by arbitrators chosen from Wikipedia's most active volunteer contributors". The wording is badly chosen, and creates a false impression of an elite group of arbitrators.
In fact, it's more likely to be a group of long-standing pseudonymous editors, most of them high-school and undergraduate students, who determine what is included and what is not included in Wikipedia. I personally support Flagged Revisions—_if_, and only _if_, those people actually reviewing diffs are accountable to the community and to the public and are at least minimally mature. —Thomas Larsen _______________________________________________ Wikimediaau-l mailing list Wikimediaaufirstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l