Indeed. I can sign under this. Wait... I have... :)
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 3:03 AM, David Goodman <dgoodmanny(a)gmail.com> wrote:
What harms the public view of Wikipedia is not
articles on minor
subjects, or on matters i anyone will understand are of significance
only to fans. What really harms the perceived quality of Wikipedia is
promotional and inaccurate articles. almost everyone can realize that
the content of a reference work may include things they do not
themselves want--but they do expect it to be both honest and accurate.
We could decide either for or against the detailed coverage of popular
culture, but what we cannot tolerate is the diversion of effort in
dealing with this. There is of course an obvious solution, which is to
silence everyone who does not agree with me, but that's not going to
fly. What we need is some way of not just forming a compromise but
having it persist--otherwise any solution will be back to the same
point in a few months. Arb com apparently does not think it is capable
of this, but I don't see how else it can be done--they should try a
little more boldness. Since they'll be criticised whatever they choose
to do or not to do, they might as well decide.
--
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG