But the underlying hostility is a problem that bothers
me a lot and I have
been trying to think of ways to bridge the gap.
My understanding has been that historically, edits to articles from
academics with strong credentials are not treated any differently than
edits from anyone else. This has resulted in many academics spending loads
of time editing an article only to be 'reverted' by a single click from a
Recent Changes Patrol, or to be slapped on the wrist with "citation
needed". This has resulted in many misunderstandings, which often did not
get a chance to be discussed in public, because academics often don't have
time to go round and round with someone on Wikipedia talk page.
I believe the culture at Wikipedia has always been that knowledge from
anyone is treated equally. While I admire that principle, it doesn't quite
jive with the academic credential culture, where opinion based on
experience and authority actually counts for something. Go to a faculty
meeting, and you shall see a Full Professor's opinion being weighted more
than an assistant professor just starting out on tenure clock.
There is in operation a Wikimedia Foundation Education program that is
small and
will not, in my opinion, scale up easily to the size needed.
Agreed. It's a culture that you're trying to change. Yes, an bridge
program can help, but it won't 'solve' the fundamental cultural differences.
--Ed