This is the place for talking about how we can make the software better, however. One way
would be to have some means of making it easier for people to read, in situ, excerpts from
texts cited, so that people can look directly at the cited work. We have more that a few
dead citations, perhaps a page on writing a bot to keep citations and links up to date?
As for the long standing problem of integrating expertise, while it is very real and of
intense interest, this is not the best forum for the discussion. Wikipedia is not peer
review, it is public review.
On Oct 26, 2012, at 6:49 PM, Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis wrote:
Progress only occurs when there are different views
that can coexist. When
you force the less popular views to disapear into a talk page, ie into
obscurity, then the stronger view becomes the only view.
So wikipedia is not solving the filter buble problem as it is now. It
simply has one filter buble created by the most enduring, by the strongest.
In my proposal, all different opinions could and should be easiliy
accessible.
2012/10/27 Magnus Manske <magnusmanske(a)googlemail.com>
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Apostolis
Xekoukoulotakis
<xekoukou(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The solution to this problem is really easy IMO.
Let all articles be
forked
and provide a personalized reputation system that
will only fetch only
one
page per article for every user.
Yes! Let's build our own [[Filter bubble]] right into Wikipedia!
Magnus
(who was there when Stallman talked about GNUpedia, aiming for that
very concept. Still aiming, though.)
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
Sincerely yours,
Apostolis Xekoukoulotakis
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l