WikiProjects
could prepare lists of reputable
printed sources in
different fields and eventually (dis)qualify a
given
source.
Sound like "L'indice dei libri proibiti", the list
of
forbidden books that catholic church used for
centuries.
It became famous for considering unreliable and
wicked
books from authors like Honoré de Balzac, Cartesio,
Daniel Defoe, Denis Diderot, Victor Hugo, Immanuel
Kant, Voltaire, Émile Zola (and many others), thus
forbidding them. ... Yours seems to me a optimistic
dream hard to make true.
In my opinion we need more WikiProjects that are
vivacious and full of
"experts". All dubious Wikipedia content should be
directed towards
WikiProjects for verification.
Plus, will these guys from the wikiprojects be able
to
be both expert AND npov? Or will they give their
opinion in all the matters in wich there isn't just
*true* way to solve the problem?
Please note that mine are just questions, I'm not
polemizing for the sake of it...
Tinette
I agree these are good questions for an ambititous
project. I do not think there are easy answers. I
really think it is premature to rely so heavily on
Wikiprojects ability as experts as well as being
neutral. They are not matured enough yet, but maybe
some day we will be able to do this. Perhaps a good
question for right now is how could we identify a
Wikiproject which has matured to such a level? How
can we encourage Wikiprojects to develop into
something we can put so much trust in?
Birgitte SB
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around