on 8/29/07 8:28 PM, Stan Shebs at stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
Peter Ansell wrote:
On 30/08/2007, Stan Shebs stanshebs@earthlink.net wrote:
Adrian wrote:
[...] We're getting swamped with fan-writing on all sorts of topics, much of it related to popular culture. I believe we need to reign this in before even more intellectual editors decide leave this kindergarten. Why is fan enthusiam encouraged over professional enthusiasm? It may give Wikipedia greater popularity in the short run, but it's ruining it in the long run. Or is it just me?
There are 99 fans for every professional (note the two sets are not disjoint), so it shouldn't be too surprising that the disproportion is reflected in WP. If we continue with our practice of quietly pruning down (usually unsourced) "fan" content, while leaving the (usually sourced) "intellectual" content, over time the intellectual content will be greater and greater.
And 99 of every 100 professionals/academics get annoyed at the fact that anyone (not just fans) can argue endlessly about minor points of intellectual topics, and hence they leave without committing a serious amount of knowledge to the encyclopedia.
In that case, Citizendium will be a stunning success, WP will fade away, and CZers will someday debate over whether WP was ever notable enough to warrant an article in CZ. :-)
But in reality, I know many of those 99 professionals, and most are not very good at large collaborative projects anyway; too used to having their pronouncements accepted uncritically, only want to interact with the "right" people (defined as "good for career"), and so on. I used to be more solicitous of professionals getting involved, but they are often far more trouble than they're worth; I just want a college student that sticks to faithfully reporting what the sources say, doesn't try to inject personal opinions dressed up to sound authoritative.
Stan
When you say the "sources", aren't you referring to the "professionals"? ;-).
Marc