I contributed the word "Wiki" to the collins dictionary site and supposedly am to be given credit for discovering the word.
Fred
From: Timwi timwi@gmx.net Reply-To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 01:44:17 +0100 To: wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Encarta goes wiki - sort of...
Neil Harris wrote:
Alphax wrote:
Make a contribution. Suitably minor, of course, so that you can write it off as a public domain minor edit.
A couple of attempts at contributing (perfectly reasonable) test edits to Encarta have resulted in nothing at all happening to the articles in question. I'm not impressed.
How long ago have you made those edits? Even if their claims of having an editorial board check every submitted edit are true, it would probably take on the order of weeks or months for your edit to appear.
The whole experience is extraordinarily lacking in incentive for Encarta contributors, who will effectively see a brick wall, if my experience is anything to go by.
I'm afraid this sounds a lot like bias from your experience with Wikipedia. You are used to your edits appearing immediately, so in comparison to that, Encarta naturally feels like a "brick wall". It is doubtful that the same kind of feeling will be experienced by casual users who are unfamiliar with "open-content encyclopedias that post their users' edits immediately". Even if they have vaguely heard of it, they will probably still readily accept a considerable delay in the processing of their contributions in return for what they perceive as superior factual accuracy.
Combined with the fact that it will dawn on them that all they are doing is enriching Microsoft, with nothing back in return, this is unlikely to gain a loyal user community.
This, in turn, exhibits your anti-Microsoft sentiment. Most casual users are not like that and view Microsoft as neutral or even friendly, and even if it occurs to them that they will be enriching Microsoft, they are unlikely to see anything wrong with it. As for "getting something back in return", they do, and it's the same thing you get on Wikipedia: some sort of satisfaction that you have helped improve something. I can even imagine that most will feel it to be more "worth it" to help Encarta because it feels somehow more important or more substantial or, dare I say it, more accurate.
Has anyone observed _any_ Encarta user edits actually becoming visible?
They have a "What's New" section where articles are listed that have recently changed (or so they claim). However, there is no way to see what exactly has changed in each article, much less does it say who suggested the change. Indeed for 99% of them you can't even view the article unless you pay.
Greetings, Timwi
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l