Steve Bennett wrote:
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:48 PM, Surreptitiousness
Okay. I'm unsure why the sofixit couldn't have applied to the complainant fleshing out the Claude Chabrol entry in the first place.
Because he's not a complainant. Because he's a commentator. Because it's just one example amongst millions. Because it's an example of a bigger problem, it's not the problem itself. Because fixing it doesn't really fix anything.
I really don't get this at all. If everyone took that approach, there would be no Wikipedia. This isn't about fixing everything, since you can't actually fix everything. See the laws of physics. This is about fixing something, and you can't fix something without actually fixing it. Hence, sofixit. Great, it's one problem amongst millions. But given there are millions of people, these problems are not insurmountable. Describing the problems as insurmountable is actually another problem, and one that needs to be challenged. Sure, there are huge arguments against fixing it, but they are just arguments. There's no real reason not to actually fix it rather than comment on it or complain about it, depending upon your point of view. Sorry, but maybe I'm too much of a doer today, but I really don't see why this is hard. Unless people are starting to believe the hype? Come on people, don't believe the hype. We're an encyclopedia project written by encyclopedia nerds that has huge flaws yet works regardless and that has become rather popular in spite of it all. If we start taking it all too seriously... delusions of grandeur? I'm still amazed at the responses I get from people when they moan about Wikipedia and I tell them to just edit it. Because, obviously, as this thread is demonstrating, much to my dismay and lack of comprehension, apparently it isn't really that simple. Except, whisper it, it is.