Daniel Mayer a écrit:
--- Shaun MacPherson
<shaun_macpherson2001(a)yahoo.ca> wrote:
Larry Sanger believes that the solution to make
Wikipedia more credible are with experts. You can see
a good article descriping his criticisms here (
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/01/03/144207&tid=95&tid=1
) posted on Jan 3, 2004.
I respect Larry and what he did to help Wikipedia along in its first year. But
I will never just assume that somebody with a PhD is right since many PhDs all
too often are not; I've come across and know of a good many PhDs who have axes
to grind and who have pet theories to push.
NPOV is a much better guarantee of accuracy than trusting a supposed expert
(although I do highly value feedback from field experts - I just don't take
their ideas as the last word).
Many in academia are used to being the gatekeepers and stewards of
information. Wiki opens those gates to anybody with an Internet connection. So
many in academia will always recoil in horror at the mere concept - that is
their problem, their failing, not ours.
I totally agree here.
Wikipedia relies on this concept that no one knows everything but
everyone knows something he can teach others. It recognises that
knowledge and rightfullness is not only due when you made upper studies.
It wonderfully succeed to give power to the lay man, to turn him from
being a passive reader of news to someone involved. It is SO empowering.