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

Reply via email to