56
edits
Wikipedia (from 142 perspective): Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
There has been some examination of the project's role and the way it portrays itself, see [[w:Wikipedia:Itself]] for a list of contributions relevant to the form of Wikipedia, itself. | There has been some examination of the project's role and the way it portrays itself, see [[w:Wikipedia:Itself]] for a list of contributions relevant to the form of Wikipedia, itself. | ||
In general, Wikipedia has a dishonest view of itself, and presents itself very dishonestly as an attempt to build an encyclopedia, when in fact it appears to do little or nothing to meet the editorial standards of a serious encyclopedia, and forces people of strong qualifications to answer to petty abuse from various parties of no particular qualifications at all. It should be seen as a project that helped build the [[GFDL text corpus]] in many languages, but is now in decline. Much as the attempt to build a "GNU Unix" built the body of [[GPL]] code. | In general, Wikipedia has a dishonest view of itself, and presents itself very dishonestly as an attempt to build an encyclopedia, when in fact it appears to do little or nothing to meet the editorial standards of a serious encyclopedia, and forces people of strong qualifications to answer to petty abuse from various parties of no particular qualifications at all, as the project turned to popular selection of contributors and casual verification of content, often on ad hominem reasoning toward authors, instead of a more formal fact-checking process. It should be seen as a project that helped build the [[GFDL text corpus]] in many languages, but is now in decline. Much as the attempt to build a "GNU Unix" built the body of [[GPL]] code. | ||
Wikipedia, more so than other wiki service in early 2004, had become a main source for re-distribution of encyclopedic content by other sites, and thus expanded the reach of errors contained in its largely unverified content. Redistribution of Wikipedia-sourced material by another user-editable encyclopedia that could prove more popular with contributors might pose the greatest risk to control by Wikipedia's founding cadre. | Wikipedia, more so than other wiki service in early 2004, had become a main source for re-distribution of encyclopedic content by other sites, and thus expanded the reach of errors contained in its largely unverified content. Redistribution of Wikipedia-sourced material by another user-editable encyclopedia that could prove more popular with contributors might pose the greatest risk to control by Wikipedia's founding cadre. | ||