On 23/04/07, Martin Peeks <martinp23(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
On a more serious note - it would help if something
were to be done to tell
those reporting just why Wikipedia articles can be vandalised, and what we
do to repair it.
Every press call on the subject ... though they seem to have been
dropping in frequency.
For what I've heard of the newspaper article (I
haven't
read it yet), they followed the usual process of looking through revisions
(or introducing deliberate vandalism) and reporting these instances as
examples of Wikipedia being evil, only their to poolute our childrens'
minds, must be banned (you see where I'm going with this..). Hopefully
when/if stable revisions arrive, a lot of the complaints will slow down. As
Wikipedia grows, and gets more press attention, its faults are pointed out
more and more often, so we need to do all we can to nullify these concerns,
and crucially let the media know how a we are taking care of the issues.
Stable versions will be a MASSIVE public relations boost. Even
journalists who understand how Wikipedia works (and many do) will
appreciate it becoming even theoretically fixable.
- d.