Indeed. Looking at this:
http://www.floatingsheep.org/2009/11/mapping-wikipedia.html
This is a similar mapping:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Imageworld-artphp3.png
I think there is a huge number of notable topics that we have not yet covered. Sure, there may be fewer sources about central Africa, but what about China and South America? The areas most Wikipedians care about are well covered, so we don't notice the gaps. The meme that Wikipedia is finished and we only need to add new things that become notable is very dangerous.
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 6:33 PM, Apoc 2400 apoc2400@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed. Looking at this:
http://www.floatingsheep.org/2009/11/mapping-wikipedia.html
This is a similar mapping:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Imageworld-artphp3.png
I think there is a huge number of notable topics that we have not yet covered. ...
Indeed: http://en.wikipedia/wiki/User:Piotrus/Wikipedia_interwiki_and_specialized_kn...
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Apoc 2400 apoc2400@gmail.com wrote:
I think there is a huge number of notable topics that we have not yet covered. Sure, there may be fewer sources about central Africa, but what about China and South America? The areas most Wikipedians care about are well covered, so we don't notice the gaps. The meme that Wikipedia is finished and we only need to add new things that become notable is very dangerous.
I wonder how we compare to Britannica et al in this regard. Certainly we don't have many articles on African countries. But do other English-language encyclopaedias?