On 24/01/2008, Shmuel Weidberg <ezrawax(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 24, 2008 3:04 PM, Nathan
<nawrich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
In theory the idea that public credit should be
given for good work is
nice - it is simply unworkable for Wikipedia. What is public credit?
What is good work? Who gets credit, in which order? Can you change the
credits over time? Who decides?
Public credit as I mentioned would be a section at the end of the
article much like Brittanica has. I don't believe they credit the
minor editors.
A fundamental problem is that we make no distinction between "editors"
and "authors", but there are very different cultural expectations for
how those two classes of contributors to a work are recognised.
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk