Louis Kyu Won Ryu wrote:
Perhaps someday there will be interest in editing these articles into an encyclopedia.
Encyclopedias are unique works that share certain characteristics beyond topical breadth and NPOV:
- They are secondary source works;
Check - I've seen very little primary material.
- They are comprehensible to a lay person;
Check - I'm a lay person in everything but CS, and I can understand random articles; with the exception of math articles, most of which need more context-setting.
- They are edited for a certain uniformity of style and content across
articles;
Check - at least half of the torrent of edits are to enforce unformity. Noobs usually learn pretty quickly to follow standard style if they want to see their text live intact for more than a day. :-)
- They cover topics that in nearly all cases can be checked and
researched further in any undergraduate college library
Check - that's where I go for my source material. Actually, "any college library" is setting the bar pretty low - college libraries aren't what they used to be.
- They are editorial in nature, that is, they are not mere
aggregations of data such as sports scores or stock prices
Check, although the unfinished articles will be lacking here.
- They serve a specific niche in a reference collection, with other
publications having related roles.
Check - when I write articles, I'm hitting the highlights and key points, and make refs and ext links point to the exhaustively in-depth stuff, and I see most other people doing the same thing. References are too few and far between still, I've been thinking about efficient ways to fix that.
So that's great, looks like WP generally fits your criteria!
Stan