The application of encyclopaedia standards must surely depend on the quality and experience of the editors. There does not seem to be a clear way of assessing this. I come to Wikipedia by way of writing for biographical dictionaries, working for a publisher of academic books, as well as researching and writing academic articles and books my field of the history of technology. I therefore automatically apply those standards to my contributions to Wikipedia. I can also apply those standards to pages which might need tweaking. When more editors with my kind of background can be persuaded to contribute on a regular basis then encyclopaedic standards will spread.
Tony Woolrich Canal Side, Huntworth, Bridgwater, Somerset UK Phone (44) 01278 663020 Email apw@ap-woolrich.co.uk
I think what is needed is some leading by example, which if you do, others, who may not share your background, can follow. Much depends, of course, on whether you can do that gracefully.
Fred
From: apw@ap-woolrich.co.uk Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:46:57 -0000 To: wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Encyclopaedia standards
The application of encyclopaedia standards must surely depend on the quality and experience of the editors. There does not seem to be a clear way of assessing this. I come to Wikipedia by way of writing for biographical dictionaries, working for a publisher of academic books, as well as researching and writing academic articles and books my field of the history of technology. I therefore automatically apply those standards to my contributions to Wikipedia. I can also apply those standards to pages which might need tweaking. When more editors with my kind of background can be persuaded to contribute on a regular basis then encyclopaedic standards will spread.
Tony Woolrich Canal Side, Huntworth, Bridgwater, Somerset UK Phone (44) 01278 663020 Email apw@ap-woolrich.co.uk
-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.1 - Release Date: 19/01/2005
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Fred Bauder (fredbaud@ctelco.net) [050123 03:15]:
I think what is needed is some leading by example, which if you do, others, who may not share your background, can follow. Much depends, of course, on whether you can do that gracefully.
A lot of which involves being a good and effective teacher to those not inclined to listen, as a volunteer ;-) Expertise is appreciated by most, but doesn't get one any free kicks at all ...
- d.
User Vacumm has vilated the 3RR, as 3RR is meant to be interpreted strictly he should now be blocked. Yours
John Bradley
Loc: 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK. Phone: +44 (0)151 708 7238 Email: john@ontobus.co.uk WWW: www.ontobus.co.uk
My assessment is that this (standards) is half the issue - the more conspicuous half. How to get adequate articles written in areas where WP collectively has little expertise is the other major question; this is not surely just a matter of applying standards, but requires people either to out on a limb, or gain access to research materials such as an academic library offers.
Anyway, there are the two limiting shortages: high-quality editors, and editors in less common areas.
Charles
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:46:57 -0000, apw@ap-woolrich.co.uk apw@ap-woolrich.co.uk wrote:
The application of encyclopaedia standards must surely depend on the quality and experience of the editors. There does not seem to be a clear way of assessing this. I come to Wikipedia by way of writing for biographical dictionaries, working for a publisher of academic books, as well as researching and writing academic articles and books my field of the history of technology. I therefore automatically apply those standards to my contributions to Wikipedia. I can also apply those standards to pages which might need tweaking. When more editors with my kind of background can be persuaded to contribute on a regular basis then encyclopaedic standards will spread.
Tony Woolrich Canal Side, Huntworth, Bridgwater, Somerset UK Phone (44) 01278 663020 Email apw@ap-woolrich.co.uk
A major issue is not to get dishearted by the Wikipedia content that is genuinely barely coherent English! The majority of Wikipedia content is certainly at least "average" quality and there are whole areas that are indeed written to a high encyclopaedic quality. However - it's not necessarily the case that the major articles are the well written ones - and one has to accept this also. For example, the parent article for all of Wikipedia's rail transport topics, [[Rail transport]] is not well laid out, or a comprehensive neat summary of the whole area, covering all appropriate sections.
Now the typical Wikipedian reaction is "so fix it", but we are all volunteers. Particularly hard work will always be in need of attention - only slowly being attended to. Eventually I hope to tweak the article in question for instance, but it is a mammoth task. There are many smaller articles I'd rather work on!
Working on Wikipedia requires some level of immunity to it's darker sides. For every VfD'ed and speedied article, there are undoubtedly pieces of pure rubbish that escape deletion for some time. Even worse are the articles requiring "cleanup" that no-one wants to attend to.
If you get dishearted, go read some of the better articles on topics you enjoy. (Don't necessarily just browse featured articles, you may encounter the one "featured article" that shouldn't be). Apart from anything else, browsing topics you enjoy is a better way of contributing to Wikipedia. For me, editing Irish-related articles is always pure bliss - as it is so easy for one in the know to ensure that they are accurate!
Zoney
--- apw@ap-woolrich.co.uk wrote:
When more editors with my kind of background can be persuaded to contribute on a regular basis...
What do you mean, can be persuaded? Wikipedia is an all-volunteer organization. People here contribute because they want to, because they believe that this will benefit mankind.
===== Chris Mahan 818.943.1850 cell chris_mahan@yahoo.com chris.mahan@gmail.com http://www.christophermahan.com/
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
--- apw@ap-woolrich.co.uk wrote:
What do you mean, can be persuaded? Wikipedia is an all-volunteer organization. People here contribute because they want to, because they believe that this will benefit mankind.
And so, my fellow 'Pedians, ask not what your Wiki can do for you --ask what you can do for your Wiki. My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what the 'Pedia will do for you, but what together we can do for the knowledge of man.
Smoddy
Christopher Mahan wrote:
--- apw@ap-woolrich.co.uk wrote:
When more editors with my kind of background can be persuaded to contribute on a regular basis...
What do you mean, can be persuaded? Wikipedia is an all-volunteer organization. People here contribute because they want to, because they believe that this will benefit mankind.
I think he just means that there are a lot of experts who would be valued contributors, but have been hanging back because of various concerns, some valid, some less so. For instance, some might be avoiding WP because they've heard about the "edit wars and vandalism" that journalists like to write about because it's exciting, but in truth, experts adding to [[Abyssocottidae]] will almost certainly have a positive experience and not have their additions messed up by the clueless.
It's an unfortunate irony that on many topics WP is already the leading reference work, online or off, but aside from some being featured articles, that part of WP gets almost no airplay compared to the controversial topics.
It would be useful to collect and report statistics about vandalism and edit wars. I have 16,000 articles on my watchlist (too many, I know!) and vandals touch maybe five of those per day, with most of the edits occurring on topics familiar to the general public (Julius Caesar, Steve Jobs, RMS Titanic, etc). If you can tell ichthyologists that the fish area of WP is 99.99% troublefree, that's a powerful argument to move data from their own websites, which likely don't even have 99% uptimes, and no army of copyeditors fixing typos.
Stan
Stan Shebs wrote:
It would be useful to collect and report statistics about vandalism and edit wars. I have 16,000 articles on my watchlist (too many, I know!) and vandals touch maybe five of those per day, with most of the edits occurring on topics familiar to the general public (Julius Caesar, Steve Jobs, RMS Titanic, etc).
As you point out, it really depends on the articles on your watchlist. I have about 1,000 on my watchlist, and the other night I was dealing with one vandalism per minute, even after pages were protected (after protection they went after the Talk: pages instead).
Jay.
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:59:47 -0800, Stan Shebs shebs@apple.com wrote:
Christopher Mahan wrote:
It would be useful to collect and report statistics about vandalism and edit wars. I have 16,000 articles on my watchlist (too many, I know!) and vandals touch maybe five of those per day, with most of the edits occurring on topics familiar to the general public (Julius Caesar, Steve Jobs, RMS Titanic, etc). If you can tell ichthyologists that the fish area of WP is 99.99% troublefree, that's a powerful argument to move data from their own websites, which likely don't even have 99% uptimes, and no army of copyeditors fixing typos.
Stan
16,000 articles on your watchlist!??!! Wow!
Miri
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:59:47 -0800, Stan Shebs shebs@apple.com wrote: <snip />I have 16,000 articles on my watchlist <snip />
wow, he has 16 000 articles on his watchlist AND he works for apple (im guessing from the email address); can this guy get any cooler?
paz y amor, [[User:The bellman]]
Robin Shannon (robin.shannon@gmail.com) [050126 22:25]:
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:59:47 -0800, Stan Shebs shebs@apple.com wrote:
<snip />I have 16,000 articles on my watchlist <snip />
wow, he has 16 000 articles on his watchlist AND he works for apple (im guessing from the email address); can this guy get any cooler?
Editing from an iPod? On a skateboard?
(About to buy a Mac mini or a recent iBook. Present Mac is a Performa 5200, aka the iTurd ...)
- d.
That gives me an idea; hows about "extreme wiki" as an activity during wikimania? The person who can make an edit in the craziest way wins.
paz y amor, [[User:The bellman]]
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 22:30:46 +1100, David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
Editing from an iPod? On a skateboard?
Robin Shannon wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:59:47 -0800, Stan Shebs shebs@apple.com wrote: <snip />I have 16,000 articles on my watchlist <snip />
wow, he has 16 000 articles on his watchlist AND he works for apple (im guessing from the email address); can this guy get any cooler?
paz y amor, [[User:The bellman]]
<blush> Of course, my management's reaction would be something like "how are you having any time for WP when there are still Tiger bugs in your queue!?!"
Stan
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 22:25:08 +1100, Robin Shannon robin.shannon@gmail.com wrote:
wow, he has 16 000 articles on his watchlist AND he works for apple (im guessing from the email address); can this guy get any cooler?
Yes, if he can sneak a Wikipedia lookup app into Tiger's Dashboard. :)