Re: [WikiEN-l] Online Newspapers Considering Subscription Model - WikiEN-l

Emily Monroe

10 Aug 10 Aug

2:42 a.m.

New subject: Online Newspapers Considering Subscription Model

Will, If I may ask a question. What if I live in a place where there isn't any library for hours (or days even) via whatever transportation I have available? What if I have a library...but it's under-resourced, under-paid and there's no way I can really get books or newsletter to help cite wikipedia? What would I do then? Do I just not verify citations? Emily On Aug 9, 2009, at 9:11 PM, WJhonson(a)aol.com wrote:

...

In a message dated 8/9/2009 6:40:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time, dan(a)tobias.name writes:

So if I wanted to cite some rare book which I happened to know of only one copy in existence, located at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station in Antarctica, it would be up to you to arrange travel there to check it.>>

------------------------- Items of this level of rarity fail our test that the item is publicly accessible. We never really set where the bar should be, but we all seemed to agree (at the time) that an item should be generally available in some way. It's too onorous to require a random editor to have to verify something against a single copy. By the way, you would think that if something this rare were really worth citing, that it would have already been published in a scholarly edition. Your example is a bit eccentric, I wonder if you have an actual case in mind. Will Johnson ************** A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=htt… ?sc=668072&hmpgID=115& bcd=JulystepsfooterNO115) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply

Emily Monroe

2:31 p.m.

New subject: Online Newspapers Considering Subscription Model

...

This conversation seems to be getting a little steeped in "attack" mode, doesn't it?

That was an honest, legitimate hypothetical question of mine. I addressed it primarily to Will, and secondarily to everybody. I never mean to attack anyone. I wouldn't live with my conscious if I had lived a life like that. If I did unintentionally attack *anyone*, then I owe an apology to Will and the list that I'm offering now.

...

So my question at this point in the debate would be to ask myself why someone who lives "in a place where there isn't any library for hours (or days even)" would be overly bothered about verifying right that second.

I didn't mean to imply that they would be bothered about verifying references right that second. I was starting to read into this debate (and maybe it's just me) that every Wikipedian should be bothered about verifying right that second. I was proven wrong when Will pointed out that that wasn't his point. Emily On Aug 10, 2009, at 9:18 AM, Surreptitiousness wrote:

...

This conversation seems to be getting a little steeped in "attack" mode, doesn't it? I mean, if we take a step back, do we verify everything we read ever period? The fact that you just read this email seems to suggest no, actually we don't. So my question at this point in the debate would be to ask myself why someone who lives "in a place where there isn't any library for hours (or days even)" would be overly bothered about verifying right that second. Yes, sometimes you just don;t verify citations. Wikipedia is built up through a kind of trust net, we're relying on other people to have checked the info out. Personally I've always taken the stance that we should cite any source, with as much detail as possible, and let the reader make the judgement as to reliability, verifiability and so on. Anyone who accepts anything at face value needs shooting, you ask me. I'll let Fred translate again if need be. David Mitchell made a similar point a while back in The Observer. Emily Monroe wrote:

Will, If I may ask a question. What if I live in a place where there isn't any library for hours (or days even) via whatever transportation I have available? What if I have a library...but it's under-resourced, under-paid and there's no way I can really get books or newsletter to help cite wikipedia? What would I do then? Do I just not verify citations? Emily On Aug 9, 2009, at 9:11 PM, WJhonson(a)aol.com wrote:

In a message dated 8/9/2009 6:40:56 PM Pacific Daylight Time, dan(a)tobias.name writes:

So if I wanted to cite some rare book which I happened to know of only one copy in existence, located at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station in Antarctica, it would be up to you to arrange travel there to check it.>>

------------------------- Items of this level of rarity fail our test that the item is publicly accessible. We never really set where the bar should be, but we all seemed to agree (at the time) that an item should be generally available in some way. It's too onorous to require a random editor to have to verify something against a single copy. By the way, you would think that if something this rare were really worth citing, that it would have already been published in a scholarly edition. Your example is a bit eccentric, I wonder if you have an actual case in mind. Will Johnson ************** A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=htt… ?sc=668072&hmpgID=115& bcd=JulystepsfooterNO115) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply

Emily Monroe

3:02 p.m.

New subject: Online Newspapers Considering Subscription Model

...

I apologise for making it unclear that I was talking about the tone of the conversation as a whole rather than your comments specifically.

I think you're right. You WERE talking about the conversation as a whole. However, I interpreted your comments as "This whole debate is in attack mode, and Emilys' comments bought my attention to it. It's so serious that I need to bring the lists' attention to it, as well." That's why I was so defensive. This has happened to me in the past, with a previous list. People were even questioning whether or not I was who I said I was (I was a young, probably mildly gifted pre-teen at the time)! Not an excuse, but since I couldn't read your body language, I jumped to conclusions based on past experiences. Sorry about that.

...

My apologies for not having got to that point in the conversation at the time I replied.

My assumption was that you did. You need to think, read, think, and then write (and think some more afterward). Don't worry though, I forgive you, and I'll forget about it. Emily On Aug 10, 2009, at 9:47 AM, Surreptitiousness wrote:

...

Emily Monroe wrote:

This conversation seems to be getting a little steeped in "attack" mode, doesn't it?

That was an honest, legitimate hypothetical question of mine. I addressed it primarily to Will, and secondarily to everybody. I never mean to attack anyone. I wouldn't live with my conscious if I had lived a life like that. If I did unintentionally attack *anyone*, then I owe an apology to Will and the list that I'm offering now.

I apologise for making it unclear that I was talking about the tone of the conversation as a whole rather than your comments specifically.

So my question at this point in the debate would be to ask myself why someone who lives "in a place where there isn't any library for hours (or days even)" would be overly bothered about verifying right that second.

I didn't mean to imply that they would be bothered about verifying references right that second. I was starting to read into this debate (and maybe it's just me) that every Wikipedian should be bothered about verifying right that second. I was proven wrong when Will pointed out that that wasn't his point.

My apologies for not having got to that point in the conversation at the time I replied. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Reply