[WikiEN-l] An expert's perspective - Tim Bray on editing the XML article

[David Gerard]

2009/8/14  <WJhonson at aol.com>:

> editing.  You might find 200 online sources that state that Mary of Parma was born
> in 956, but I can show that none of these are realiable sources.  My own
> opinion on when she was born has nothing to do with anything, sources are what
> matters.


The problem comes not in finding sources, but in establishing due
weight, convincing anyone that a crank idea is a crank idea and so
forth. Most usually, it's when an expert is arguing with a crank and
the crank won't be satisfied until the expert proves a negative -
there's no great sources that the crank idea is a crank idea because
only the cranks even bother talking about it. Often, the expert goes
"bugger this, I have better things to do." Even quite patient experts
have a limited tolerance for idiocy.

For an extreme case, look at the first global warming arbitration
case, where the cranks got together to try to get one of the UK's top
climate scientists voted off the island. Fortunately, the AC had the
presence of mind to point out that peer-reviewed scientific papers are
rather better encyclopedia sources than Rush Limbaugh show
transcripts. And the expert in question also happens to be a rather
good Wikipedian.

Abd's proposed rule is pathologically anti-expert and would be
disastrous for Wikipedia's content and its production process.


- d.