*whoosh*
On 7/23/08, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com wrote:
Man, one new yorker cartoon per article. Why didn't wikipedia think of that?
Because encyclopedias should not be relying on self-aggrandizing, unfunny, and poorly considered cartoons such as the New Yorker; and we should be focusing on legitimate information.
Case in point: Would the Barack Obama article be improved by the inevitable inclusion of the incredibly offensive and almost universally criticized cartoon of him in terrorist garb fist-bumping an afro wearing militant Michelle Obama? Yes, that's certainly neutral point of view right there. Ignoring for a second the epic fail in their poor taste attempt at satire, the New Yorker's cartoons are by definition non-neutral, and as such would unduly skew any Wikipedia article they were added to.
It's just more of a sign that Knol is not actually even attempting to be a competitor to Wikipedia, and rather a whole different genre of product.
--
Dan Rosenthal
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l