The battle for Wikipedia's soul - The Economist on the future of Wikipedia

 
  http://www.economist.com/printedition/di
splaystory.cfm?story_id=10789354
   
  An excerpt:
   
  "Wikipedia is facing an identity crisis...It can
either strive to encompass every aspect of human knowledge,
no matter how trivial; or it can adopt a more stringent
editorial policy and ban articles on trivial subjects, in
the hope that this will enhance its reputation as a
trustworthy and credible reference source. These two
conflicting visions are at the heart of a bitter struggle
inside Wikipedia between 'inclusionists', who believe that
applying strict editorial criteria will dampen contributors'
enthusiasm for the project, and 'deletionists' who argue
that Wikipedia should be more cautious and selective about
its entries."
   
  Bernie Sloan

       
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast with
Yahoo! Search.
_______________________________________________
Web4lib mailing list
Web4libwebjunction.org
http://lists.we
bjunction.org/web4lib/

This is by far the best article I've read on Wikipedia in
several
years.  It touches all the problem spots, perfectly.

I can't agree more with this:

"These rules are used to devise official policies on
particular
subjects, such as the notability of pornographic stars (a
Playboy
appearance earns you a Wikipedia mention; starring in a
low-budget
movie does not) or ..."

These notability "rules" (which are interpreted
every which way) are
what stops Wikipedia from reflecting the work of independent
artists. 
This means artists whose work is directly on the Web as well
as off it.
The work of the "deletionists" around the whole
topic of web comics is
an extremely visible case for this.  A few years back you
had articles
on just about every Web comic existing.  Now the pendulum
has swung in
the other direction and it's nearly impossible to put an
article on a
Web comic in there.

The sad thing is that the work of the deletionists is not
focused in a
general way on maintaining a good level of quality or
"notability" on
all types of articles .  It's focused instead on a limited
set of
popular topics, or "dangerous" political topics.

Alain Vaillancourt

--- "B.G. Sloan" <bgsloan2yahoo.com> a écrit :

>  
>  
>
http://www.economist.com/printedition/di
splaystory.cfm?story_id=10789354
>    
>   An excerpt:
>    
>   "Wikipedia is facing an identity crisis...It can
either strive to
> encompass every aspect of human knowledge, no matter
how trivial; or
> it can adopt a more stringent editorial policy and ban
articles on
> trivial subjects, in the hope that this will enhance
its reputation
> as a trustworthy and credible reference source. These
two conflicting
> visions are at the heart of a bitter struggle inside
Wikipedia
> between 'inclusionists', who believe that applying
strict editorial
> criteria will dampen contributors' enthusiasm for the
project, and
> 'deletionists' who argue that Wikipedia should be more
cautious and
> selective about its entries."
>    
>   Bernie Sloan
> 
>        
> ---------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast
with Yahoo!
> Search.
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4libwebjunction.org
> http://lists.we
bjunction.org/web4lib/
> 



      Découvrez les styles qui font sensation sur Yahoo!
Québec Avatars.
http://cf.avatars.yahoo.
com/
_______________________________________________
Web4lib mailing list
Web4libwebjunction.org
http://lists.we
bjunction.org/web4lib/

This is by far the best article I've read on Wikipedia in
several
years.  It touches all the problem spots, perfectly.

I can't agree more with this:

"These rules are used to devise official policies on
particular
subjects, such as the notability of pornographic stars (a
Playboy
appearance earns you a Wikipedia mention; starring in a
low-budget
movie does not) or ..."

These notability "rules" (which are interpreted
every which way) are
what stops Wikipedia from reflecting the work of independent
artists. 
This means artists whose work is directly on the Web as well
as off it.
The work of the "deletionists" around the whole
topic of web comics is
an extremely visible case for this.  A few years back you
had articles
on just about every Web comic existing.  Now the pendulum
has swung in
the other direction and it's nearly impossible to put an
article on a
Web comic in there.

The sad thing is that the work of the deletionists is not
focused in a
general way on maintaining a good level of quality or
"notability" on
all types of articles .  It's focused instead on a limited
set of
popular topics, or "dangerous" political topics.

Alain Vaillancourt

--- "B.G. Sloan" <bgsloan2yahoo.com> a écrit :

>  
>  
>
http://www.economist.com/printedition/di
splaystory.cfm?story_id=10789354
>    
>   An excerpt:
>    
>   "Wikipedia is facing an identity crisis...It can
either strive to
> encompass every aspect of human knowledge, no matter
how trivial; or
> it can adopt a more stringent editorial policy and ban
articles on
> trivial subjects, in the hope that this will enhance
its reputation
> as a trustworthy and credible reference source. These
two conflicting
> visions are at the heart of a bitter struggle inside
Wikipedia
> between 'inclusionists', who believe that applying
strict editorial
> criteria will dampen contributors' enthusiasm for the
project, and
> 'deletionists' who argue that Wikipedia should be more
cautious and
> selective about its entries."
>    
>   Bernie Sloan
> 
>        
> ---------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast
with Yahoo!
> Search.
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4libwebjunction.org
> http://lists.we
bjunction.org/web4lib/
> 



      Découvrez les styles qui font sensation sur Yahoo!
Québec Avatars.
http://cf.avatars.yahoo.
com/
_______________________________________________
Web4lib mailing list
Web4libwebjunction.org
http://lists.we
bjunction.org/web4lib/