From: "Andrea Zanni" <zanni.andrea84(a)gmail.com>
It seems that Humanities are overall a problematic
area for Wikipedia,
because less involved in consensus building, and much focused in the
stratification of different interpretations.
No quite untrue. My background is analytic philosophy and I have worked on
many articles and have made friends with those working in the 'European'
tradition of philosophy. We settled our differences (indeed ignored our
differences from the beginning) and worked to defend philosophy articles
from the endless vandalism. There was never any disagreement. But most of
them have given up by now.
From: "Excirial" <wp.excirial(a)gmail.com>
The problem you mention is actually the stagnation of
edits.
You snipped the bit where I talked about the benchmark article which is
gradually eroded into chaos. Unless the articles are well looked after by
those that care and understand, they deteriorate and rot away. Do you
propose any solutions for this? I'm interesting in solutions.
From: "Fred Bauder" <fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net>
We need to set up a regular mechanism which analyzes
and searches for
errors.
Well I'm working through articles and writing them up and reporting them
(I'm not correcting them, obviously). But there are many thousands of
errors, and I am one person :(