WP in UK press - WikiEN-l - lists.wikimedia.org

List overview All Threads
Download

WP in UK press

[mvogrein@cogeco.ca: Re: Wikipedia...

Fwd: [Foundation-l] Rewarding...

Charles Matthews

12 Sep 2004 12 Sep '04

11:02 a.m.

A positive article 'Wiki's wacky but it works' in today's London Observer, Business section, by John Naughton who typically writes on Internet topics. It takes the line that WP is good at 'self-healing', and is generally better (more comprehensive) than Britannica Online. Charles

Reply

Show replies by date

Arwel Parry

12 Sep 12 Sep

3:16 p.m.

In message <000501c498b8$0e944920$d4000450@Galasien>, Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews-XZoyATsUNX5Wk0Htik3J/w(a)public.gmane.org> writes

A positive article 'Wiki's wacky but it works' in today's London Observer, Business section, by John Naughton who typically writes on Internet topics. It takes the line that WP is good at 'self-healing', and is generally better (more comprehensive) than Britannica Online. Charles

Link at http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1302435,00.html -- Arwel Parry http://www.cartref.demon.co.uk/

Reply

John Lee

4:06 p.m.

The article in question can be found at: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1302435,00.html John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]]) Charles Matthews wrote:

A positive article 'Wiki's wacky but it works' in today's London Observer, Business section, by John Naughton who typically writes on Internet topics. It takes the line that WP is good at 'self-healing', and is generally better (more comprehensive) than Britannica Online.

Reply

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

5:02 p.m.

"It's an 'open source' project - all of its content is in the public domain. You can find it at www.wikipedia.org." Some quality journalism by the guardian. On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:06:16 +0800, John Lee <johnleemk(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

The article in question can be found at: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1302435,00.html John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]]) Charles Matthews wrote:

A positive article 'Wiki's wacky but it works' in today's London Observer, Business section, by John Naughton who typically writes on Internet topics. It takes the line that WP is good at 'self-healing', and is generally better (more comprehensive) than Britannica Online.

_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply

Matthew Larsen

5:42 p.m.

is it wrong? On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:02:48 +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab(a)gmail.com> wrote:

"It's an 'open source' project - all of its content is in the public domain. You can find it at www.wikipedia.org." Some quality journalism by the guardian. On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:06:16 +0800, John Lee <johnleemk(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

The article in question can be found at: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1302435,00.html John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]]) Charles Matthews wrote:

A positive article 'Wiki's wacky but it works' in today's London Observer, Business section, by John Naughton who typically writes on Internet topics. It takes the line that WP is good at 'self-healing', and is generally better (more comprehensive) than Britannica Online.

_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

-- Matthew Larsen

mat.larsen(a)gmail.com 07739 785 249

Reply

Delirium

6:38 p.m.

Matthew Larsen wrote:

is it wrong?

Yes. The vast majority of our content is not in the public domain; it is licensed under the GFDL. -Mark

Reply

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

6:50 p.m.

I contacted him about this misstatement and hopefully he'll correct it. On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:38:38 -0400, Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org> wrote:

Matthew Larsen wrote:

is it wrong?

Yes. The vast majority of our content is not in the public domain; it is licensed under the GFDL. -Mark _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply

Matthew Larsen

7:02 p.m.

and he will probably never write about it again! nice one! On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:50:44 +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I contacted him about this misstatement and hopefully he'll correct it. On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:38:38 -0400, Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org> wrote:

Matthew Larsen wrote:

is it wrong?

Yes. The vast majority of our content is not in the public domain; it is licensed under the GFDL. -Mark _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

-- Matthew Larsen

mat.larsen(a)gmail.com 07739 785 249

Reply

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

7:07 p.m.

Why do you think that he will never write about wikipedia again? Because i wrote him and to correct a mistake i made? I think you overestemate his fragility as a journalist. On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:02:12 +0100, Matthew Larsen <mat.larsen(a)gmail.com> wrote:

and he will probably never write about it again! nice one! On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:50:44 +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I contacted him about this misstatement and hopefully he'll correct it. On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:38:38 -0400, Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org> wrote:

Matthew Larsen wrote:

is it wrong?

Yes. The vast majority of our content is not in the public domain; it is licensed under the GFDL. -Mark _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

-- Matthew Larsen

mat.larsen(a)gmail.com 07739 785 249

Reply

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

7:08 p.m.

s/i made/he made/ On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 21:07:57 +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Why do you think that he will never write about wikipedia again? Because i wrote him and to correct a mistake i made? I think you overestemate his fragility as a journalist. On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:02:12 +0100, Matthew Larsen <mat.larsen(a)gmail.com> wrote:

and he will probably never write about it again! nice one! On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:50:44 +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I contacted him about this misstatement and hopefully he'll correct it. On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 14:38:38 -0400, Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org> wrote:

Matthew Larsen wrote: >is it wrong? > > Yes. The vast majority of our content is not in the public domain; it is licensed under the GFDL. -Mark _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

-- Matthew Larsen

mat.larsen(a)gmail.com 07739 785 249

Reply

Ray Saintonge

7:24 p.m.

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

Why do you think that he will never write about wikipedia again? Because i wrote him and to correct a mistake i made? I think you overestemate his fragility as a journalist. On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 20:02:12 +0100, Matthew Larsen <mat.larsen(a)gmail.com> wrote: >and he will probably never write about it again! nice one! > ><avarab(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >>I contacted him about this misstatement and hopefully he'll correct it. >>

Pointing out his error does not detract from the thrust of his message. Although we are conscious of the important difference between PD and GFDL, it is still secondary to the point that he was trying to make. I would speculate that he will view the pointing out of this error as a natural part of the "self healing" process that he praised. Ec

Reply

Charles Matthews

7:29 p.m.

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote

I contacted him about this misstatement and hopefully he'll correct it.

It might have been a deliberate over-simplification, of course. Charles

Reply

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

5:45 p.m.

Yes On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 19:02:48 +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab(a)gmail.com> wrote:

"It's an 'open source' project - all of its content is in the public domain. You can find it at www.wikipedia.org." Some quality journalism by the guardian. On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:06:16 +0800, John Lee <johnleemk(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

The article in question can be found at: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1302435,00.html John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]]) Charles Matthews wrote:

A positive article 'Wiki's wacky but it works' in today's London Observer, Business section, by John Naughton who typically writes on Internet topics. It takes the line that WP is good at 'self-healing', and is generally better (more comprehensive) than Britannica Online.

_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply

Ray Saintonge

6:03 p.m.

John Lee wrote:

The article in question can be found at: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1302435,00.html Charles Matthews wrote:

A positive article 'Wiki's wacky but it works' in today's London Observer, Business section, by John Naughton who typically writes on Internet topics. It takes the line that WP is good at 'self-healing', and is generally better (more comprehensive) than Britannica Online.

I particularly liked the comments in the closing paragraph. These clearly suggest that this revolution is much bigger than Wikipedia.

We have become so imbued by the conventional wisdom of managerial capitalism that we think the only way to do things is via hierarchical, top-down, tightly controlled organisations that are highly tuned and incredibly fragile. Wikipedia is none of these things, yet it works brilliantly. There's a lesson there for control freaks.

Ec

Reply

7203

days inactive

7203

days old

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

13 comments

7 participants

tags (0)

participants (7)

Arwel Parry
Charles Matthews
Delirium
John Lee
Matthew Larsen
Ray Saintonge
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason