Pete/Pcb21 wrote:
Larry Sanger has again written at length about
the history of
Wikipedia
in two articles posted on Slashdot.
[snip]
- including a follow-up by Sanger, giving his
take on the "was he or
wasn't he the co-founder" debate, in particular
I don't think any reasonable person would object to calling Larry a
"co-founder of Wikipedia". To call one troll on a blog comment a
"debate" is to blow things extraordinarily out of proportion.
Larry hasn't been involved in the project in some three years (3/4 of
its lifetime), and most Wikipedians today have had little or no
interaction with Larry. As a result, he's seen now as an outsider, and
his criticisms are easily (mis)interpreted as attacks against a
community he's not part of.
I've only skimmed these posts, but they seem to boil down to historical
trivia ("we had 24 articles not 12!") and saying we should do things
that are already on the roadmap (eg, a more formally-vetted release in
addition to the rough-and-tumble development Wikipedia).
It'd be nice if people could avoid making a mountain out of a molehill
over this. Larry's not our enemy.
-- brion vibber (brion @
pobox.com)
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org