[WikiEN-l] Do experts have a moral obligation to contribute to Wikipedia?

[Charles Matthews]

David Gerard wrote:
> http://blog.k1v1n.com/2009/08/if-tree-falls-in-forest-part-1.html
>
> He thinks that experts have a moral obligation to contribute to
> Wikipedia, because it's the source people actually go to.
>   
So first you need to show that there is an obligation to do anything 
[[pro bono publico]] if you are an expert. (OK, declaring that you are 
doing something pro bono helps shore up a reputation as an expert, but 
that is not quite what we are discussing.) Then you need to prove that 
the effectiveness of what you so do should be measured in the sort of 
"mass media" terms implied here: discrimination about whom you inform is 
pretty much irrelevant. Then you need to show everyone uses Google and 
never gets down to the bottom of the first page. (These do seem to be 
getting easier.)

How about the simpler comment that if you have expertise in an area of 
public interest, you should consider writing something freely licensed 
and putting it on the Web where someone can find it and help aggregate 
it? Those who compile WP tend to have more sophisticated search habits 
than putting a single keyword into Google and hoping for the best. 
(Someone please reassure me that this is true ...)

Charles