From: Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Times article,and BBC and Press Association followups Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 20:17:47 -0700
George Herbert wrote:
On 4/11/07, Marc Riddell michaeldavid86@comcast.net wrote:
on 4/11/07 12:28 PM, Erik Moeller at wrote:
How is an open, continuing debate about a variety of issues an indication of "governance broken beyond repair"? Inflammatory comments like this are unhelpful.
I don't believe it's beyond repair, but can you honestly say that among these "variety of issues" there has not been some serious concerns about
the
state of leadership in WP?
There are also legitimate disagreements about the equivalents of "fundamental pillars"; Larry clearly believes that anonymity and levelling the expert/non expert playing field are bad for any project, and took the cause and effects of the Essjay incident as an example of some of that.
From the viewpoint that having people fake credentials is bad, anyone
looking at Wikipedia as-is has to conclude that we're pretty close to fundamentally and structurally broken.
Whatever might be said about the honesty of Essjay's self-representation, not much has been said to challenge the scholastic validity of his information.
Ec
Not really fair, several people exhaustively combed through Essjay's content contributions, checking for dubious material. He only made 300 of them, anyway.
Moreschi
_________________________________________________________________ Get Hotmail, News, Sport and Entertainment from MSN on your mobile. http://www.msn.txt4content.com/