--- Patrick Aiden Hunt <skyler1534(a)comcast.net> wrote:
I know this may seem to some to be a silly question,
but why do you need
someone with academic credentials reviewing articles? Any normal
encyclopedia simply uses a basic bibliography and the information in the
article is from books that are written by experts who have academic
credentials already recognized. If we had people simply cite sources for
information, then it seems like we would have to worry much less about
the reviewers' credentials.
Pragmatic; many people will not trust and in fact warn people against using our
content otherwise. Think of it as building a bridge to the old way of
publishing and to the drones who think that is the only way content can be
trusted.
It is also another level of article verification - at least one set of eyes
from somebody who has formal training in the subject has looked at the article
and says its OK. That is more like how academic/scientific peer review works
(although panels in the related field are most often used instead).
I for one value that type of feedback for my articles since I hardly ever write
in the area I majored in.
The important thing is that this is in addition to our current best practices
and not a replacement for them. Just another layer.
-- mav
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail