David Gerard wrote:
Seen this?
http://store.britannica.com/jump.jsp?itemID=114 http://store.britannica.com/jump.jsp?itemID=114&itemType=CATEGORY&iMainCat= 4&iSubCat=114&sort=1&dpid=14 &itemType=CATEGORY&iMainCat=4&iSubCat=114&sort=1&dpid=14
You can get the full Britannica DVD for US$25!
At that sort of price, I'm tempted to get one myself, not least to say to journalists that I'm not only a fan but I bought a copy ...
And they're clearing this at US$20:
http://store.britannica.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=247 http://store.britannica.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=247&item Type=PRODUCT&iProductID=247 &itemType=PRODUCT&iProductID=247
Anyone with dreams of a printed Wikipedia 1.0 should look at this and think how we can get there.
- d.
Well, the first thing we need to do is to figure out where we are, especially as we have passed the point where we can just say "We have 1,000,000 articles!" and that gives us more weight. From now on, the raw number is going to matter less and less and our quality is what will become the yardstick to measure us.
In an often-neglected corner of the project namespace, the [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team]] has quietly been assessing articles, and has made several lists of articles that are in great shape and those that need improvement. Since any encyclopedia should have articles that comprise a "core", several editors have gone through and assessed all the articles listed on [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Core topics]]. There's a few good ones, but there's some that need vast improvement. An example would be the [[Toy]] article. Now, who would like to publish on paper an article that looks more like a list than anything else? That's just a start. All the articles with a "Start" as their assessment are not usable in Wikipedia 1.0 and need some tender and caring love.
Then there's also independent WikiProjects. All active WikiProjects have now been contacted, and have been asked for listings of articles that they consider to be of high quality. The results we have are available at [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/WikiProject full article list]]. However, as you can see, there's still gaps-we need to have some projects answer, and there's others that we just need to prune. However, the centralized article list also tells us which projects are active, some of them dishing out FAs at a constant rate.
That said, this is nowhere even close to being done: there's still quite a bit of work to do. Look at the lists I've given and those given at [[Wikipedia:Article assessment]] to look at what's the most urgent to fix. Better yet, go and help violet/riga with the current topic at [[Wikipedia:Article assessment/African countries]], as it looks rather empty. Overall, there's plenty of things to do and too few hands to do it, and you get the same warm, fuzzy sensation you feel when you're being a rogue admin...
Titoxd.