I insist that this problem is not different from the problem of
Newspapers or Magazines.
Wherever there is mass-diffusion, there is a risk of disinformation.
Matt Brown wrote:
I think there is a good deal of un-necessary panic
going around about
this USA Today thing. Did it really tell us anything new? No.
Misinformation in rarely visited articles has ALWAYS been a problem.
It's also not nearly as amenable to any kind of automated process as
image tagging.
Let's not run around like headless chickens because some journalist
found that conspiracy-theorist things had been put into his Wikipedia
article.
Fact is: Wikipedia's improving. At quite a tremendous rate, in fact.
It's easy to forget (a) the magnitude of the task, and (b) how bad we
were even a year ago.
-Matt
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l