This link has been bookmarked by 58 people . It was first bookmarked on 02 Mar 2006, by Torsten Rox-Edling.
-
19 Mar 12
-
First problem: lack of public perception of credibility, particularly in areas of detail.
-
regardless of whether Wikipedia actually is more or less reliable than the average encyclopedia, it is not perceived as adequately reliable by many librarians, teachers, and academics
-
there are no traditional review processes
-
Perhaps Wikipedia is better described as one of those sources regarded as unreliable which people read anyway
-
when it comes to relatively specialized topics (outside of the interests of most of the contributors), the project's credibility is very uneven
-
no article at all, a very amateurish-sounding article, or an article that looks like it might once have been pretty good, but which has been hacked to bits by hoi polloi.
-
Second problem: the dominance of difficult people, trolls, and their enablers.
-
a certain poisonous social or political atmosphere in the project.
-
But there are myriad abuses and problems that never make it to mediation, let alone arbitration.
-
This explains why I am gone; it also explains why many others, including some extremely knowledgeable and helpful people, have left the project.
-
The root problem: anti-elitism, or lack of respect for expertise.
-
This lack of respect for expertise explains the first problem, because if the project participants had greater respect for expertise, they would have long since invited a board of academics and researchers to manage a culled version of Wikipedia
-
This lack of respect for expertise and authority also explains the second problem, because again if the project participants had greater respect for expertise, there would necessarily be very little patience for those who deliberately disrupt the project.
-
A less tolerant attitude toward disruption would make the project more polite, welcoming, and indeed open to the vast majority of intelligent, well-meaning people on the Internet
-
The project can both prize and praise its most knowledgeable contributors, and permit contribution by persons with no credentials whatsoever.
-
Nevertheless, everyone familiar with Wikipedia can now see the power of the basic Wikipedia idea and the crying need to get more experts on board and a publicly credible review process in place
-
-
27 Sep 11
-
08 Dec 09
-
22 Sep 09
-
09 Nov 07
-
25 Apr 07
-
07 Dec 06
Howard DaleA criticism of wikipedia from one of its original founders
-
31 Jul 06
-
14 Jun 06
-
19 May 06
-
27 Apr 06
-
23 Apr 06
-
31 Mar 06
-
16 Feb 06
-
15 Dec 05
Dhul Qarnayncultura de la wikipedia -- importante para la comunidad de práctica
collaboration culture wikipedia wiki socialsoftware for:ananias
-
10 Nov 05
-
29 Oct 05
-
27 Oct 05
-
19 Oct 05
-
25 Aug 05
-
04 Jul 05
a k'walaWikipedia does have two big problems, and attention to them is long overdue.
-
20 Jun 05
-
12 Jun 05
-
08 May 05
-
01 Apr 05
-
14 Mar 05
-
05 Mar 05
-
03 Feb 05
-
07 Jan 05
-
Wikipedia has started to hit the big time. Accordingly, several critical articles have come out, including "The Faith-Based Encyclopedia" by a former editor-in-chief of Britannica and a very widely-syndicated AP article that was given such titles as "When Information Access Is So Easy, Truth Can Be Elusive". These articles are written by people who appear not to appreciate the merits of Wikipedia fully. I do, however; I co-founded Wikipedia. (I have since left the project.) Wikipedia does have two big problems, and attention to them is long overdue. These problems could be eliminated by eliminating a single root problem. If the project's managers are not willing to solve it, I fear a fork (a new edition under new management, for the non-techies reading this) will probably be necessary.
-
-
04 Jan 05
-
-
Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism (Op-Ed) By lsanger Fri Dec 31st, 2004 at 12:42:24 AM EST Internet Wikipedia has started to hit the big time. Accordingly, several critical articles have come out, including "The Faith-Based Encyclopedia" by a former editor-in-chief of Britannica and a very widely-syndicated AP article that was given such titles as "When Information Access Is So Easy, Truth Can Be Elusive". These articles are written by people who appear not to appreciate the merits of Wikipedia fully. I do, however; I co-founded Wikipedia. (I have since left the project.) Wikipedia does have two big problems, and attention to them is long overdue. These problems could be eliminated by eliminating a single root problem. If the project's managers are not willing to solve it, I fear a fork (a new edition under new management, for the non-techies reading this) will probably be necessary
-
Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism (Op-Ed) By lsanger Fri Dec 31st, 2004 at 12:42:24 AM EST Internet Wikipedia has started to hit the big time. Accordingly, several critical articles have come out, including "The Faith-Based Encyclopedia" by a former editor-in-chief of Britannica and a very widely-syndicated AP article that was given such titles as "When Information Access Is So Easy, Truth Can Be Elusive". These articles are written by people who appear not to appreciate the merits of Wikipedia fully. I do, however; I co-founded Wikipedia. (I have since left the project.) Wikipedia does have two big problems, and attention to them is long overdue. These problems could be eliminated by eliminating a single root problem. If the project's managers are not willing to solve it, I fear a fork (a new edition under new management, for the non-techies reading this) will probably be necessary
-
Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism (Op-Ed) By lsanger Fri Dec 31st, 2004 at 12:42:24 AM EST Internet Wikipedia has started to hit the big time. Accordingly, several critical articles have come out, including "The Faith-Based Encyclopedia" by a former editor-in-chief of Britannica and a very widely-syndicated AP article that was given such titles as "When Information Access Is So Easy, Truth Can Be Elusive". These articles are written by people who appear not to appreciate the merits of Wikipedia fully. I do, however; I co-founded Wikipedia. (I have since left the project.) Wikipedia does have two big problems, and attention to them is long overdue. These problems could be eliminated by eliminating a single root problem. If the project's managers are not willing to solve it, I fear a fork (a new edition under new management, for the non-techies reading this) will probably be necessary
-
-
03 Jan 05
-
Wikipedia has started to hit the big time. Accordingly, several critical articles have come out, including "The Faith-Based Encyclopedia" by a former editor-in-chief of Britannica and a very widely-syndicated AP article that was given such titles as "When Information Access Is So Easy, Truth Can Be Elusive". These articles are written by people who appear not to appreciate the merits of Wikipedia fully. I do, however; I co-founded Wikipedia. (I have since left the project.) Wikipedia does have two big problems, and attention to them is long overdue. These problems could be eliminated by eliminating a single root problem. If the project's managers are not willing to solve it, I fear a fork (a new edition under new management, for the non-techies reading this) will probably be necessary.
-
-
01 Jan 05
-
I know, of course, that Wikipedia works because it is radically open. I recognized that as soon as anyone; indeed, it was part of the original plan. But I firmly disagree with the notion that that Wikipedia-fertilizing openness requires disrespect toward expertise. The project can both prize and praise its most knowledgeable contributors, and permit contribution by persons with no credentials whatsoever. That, in fact, was my original conception of the project. It is sad that the project did not go in that direction.
-
-
-
Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism
-
Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism
-
Why Wikipedia Must Jettison Its Anti-Elitism
-
-
31 Dec 04
Page Comments
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.