That's true - a WP article is only as good as the sources which it uses!

Also - could I ask facebook/twitter users to like/share/retweet these posts?
 https://twitter.com/wm_au/status/393501352606695424
 https://www.facebook.com/wikimedia.au/posts/572865989433764

Regards,

Charles



On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 9:11 AM, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raym...@gmail.com>wrote:

> One could also comment that the citations added in the climate change
> section are to major scientific organisations in Australia and
> internationally.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 25/10/2013, at 9:07 AM, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raym...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The article has had a lot of edits in the past week and the climate change
> section looks like it has been added after the Greg Hunt story. I note a
> few familiar usernames in the edit history as well as IPs. some reverting
> has occurred.
>
> How to phrase it ... Hmm ... I think a key point is that WP is a living
> encyclopedia and events (being both the current bush fires themselves and
> the Greg Hunt statement) focus attention onto those parts of WP, which
> results in them being updated and improved. In that regard some recent
> edits have added information about the relationship between climate change
> and bush fires including citations. WP's role is not to tell people whether
> or not to believe in climate change but to present the best quality summary
> of factual information (with citations for people who want to dig deeper)
> and let people make up their own minds. Greg Hunt has made up his mind in
> one way, others may come to different conclusions. We are delighted that
> Greg Hunt regards WP as an authoritative source but we would urge all
> readers to read the cited material if they need a detailed knowledge of a
> topic on which to make important decisions.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 25/10/2013, at 8:43 AM, Liam Wyatt <liamwy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Good morning :-)
>
> I've just been called by the producer for ABC702 morning show (presenter
> is Linda Mottram) and asked to talk on radio sometime between 10 and 10:30
> about Wikipedia's errors, how we improve the contet etc, etc, - in the
> context of the recent bushfire / Greg Hunt story in the media.
>
> I can obviously talk about how we get better and that we don't pretend to
> be perfect and that we encourage people to check the footnote and make
> their own assessment... But can someone please advise on the best way to
> phrase how the specific article [[Bushfires in Australia]] appeared last
> week and what has changed? I see there is a "climate change" section - was
> that already there a few days ago? (I can check the history when I get to
> the office, on my mobile at the moment, wanted to write to you straight
> away).
>
> Any advice, ideas? I recall there being a userspace proposal on the
> chapter wiki - can someone point me to that again and advise if you think
> it's appropriate for me to try to quote?
>
> Sincerely,
> -Liam
>
>
>
> --
> wittylama.com
> Peace, love & metadata
>
>
>
> --
> wittylama.com
> Peace, love & metadata
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Reply via email to