From: Toby Bartels toby+wikipedia@math.ucr.edu Larry has already suggested that Nupedia might act like this; well, we could have a site that covers Team Nupedia and a bunch of other certification teams too, if there's interest.
OK, two comments: (1) while I and others have often said in the past that Nupedia is perfectly free to use Wikipedia articles, and even that Nupedia could serve as a Wikipedia-vetting project, that is *not* my most recent proposal. Most recently I specifically said that we probably shouldn't impose on Nupedia to act as a filter for Wikipedia. The main reason for this is simply that that isn't what the many good people who signed up for the Nupedia project signed up for; they'd be furious if I tried to hijack their project that way, even if it's a project that isn't currently going anywhere.
(2) No offense but I really don't want any "team" of reviewers that I help organize associated with other (nonprofessional) reviewing "teams" as designated by Wikipedia. That essentially defeats the purpose of the proposal, viz., to use Wikipedia-created materials to create a *clearly more credible*, mother-, teacher-, and librarian-approved resource. I'm not saying there couldn't be any other reviewing scheme in place, just that the professional-level reviewing body should not "just another Wikipedia reviewing team." That entails that it should just be as completely independent of Wikipedia.
Larry
Larry Sanger wrote:
The main reason for this is simply that that isn't what the many good people who signed up for the Nupedia project signed up for; they'd be furious if I tried to hijack their project that way, even if it's a project that isn't currently going anywhere.
I'm considering a mass email to ask them what they want to do. I think it's perfectly reasonable for us to offer to setup software for them to start reviewing and approving articles from Wikipedia. I can't imagine why they'd be furious about it.
--Jimbo
|From: Jimmy Wales jwales@bomis.com |Content-Disposition: inline |Sender: wikipedia-l-admin@wikipedia.org |Reply-To: wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org |Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 07:51:45 -0800 | |Larry Sanger wrote: |> The main reason for |> this is simply that that isn't what the many good people who signed up for |> the Nupedia project signed up for; they'd be furious if I tried to hijack |> their project that way, even if it's a project that isn't currently going |> anywhere. | |I'm considering a mass email to ask them what they want to do. I |think it's perfectly reasonable for us to offer to setup software for |them to start reviewing and approving articles from Wikipedia. I |can't imagine why they'd be furious about it. | |--Jimbo
Like many on the Wiki side, I've never warmed up to Nu, possibly because Wiki lets me write any article I want and Nu probably wouldn't let me write on any subject, what with my not being an expert on anything.
Nonetheless, it seems totally appropriate to solve this problem of incoherence and occasionally upsetting behavior (inherent in the nature of Wikipedia), by moving properly vetted, well-behaved, near-complete, shoe-and-shirt-wearing articles from Wikipedia to Nupedia.
I still think Wikipedia will continue to be the more interesting, active, and complete encyclopedia.
Tom Parmenter Ortolan88
Jimmy Wales wrote:
Larry Sanger wrote:
The main reason for this is simply that that isn't what the many good people who signed up for the Nupedia project signed up for; they'd be furious if I tried to hijack their project that way, even if it's a project that isn't currently going anywhere.
I'm considering a mass email to ask them what they want to do. I think it's perfectly reasonable for us to offer to setup software for them to start reviewing and approving articles from Wikipedia. I can't imagine why they'd be furious about it.
The important thing is that we don't *replace* Nupedia with that new project, at least not initially. If it turns out that the wikipedia spin-off boosts, we might think again, in a year or so.
There's another effect we might want to consider. Suppose I want to copy a wikipedia article to that spin-off, and I will be listed as the one who did, I'd make pretty sure the article is correct in the first place, and covers all important points. I'd also like it to be well written. Now, a good article from wikipedia might lack a few minor things before I'd consider it ready to be approved. So, the obvoius thing is for me to edit the wikipedia article and fix these (minor) items before I approve it. As a result, wikipedia itself will improve from the spin-off.
I think.
I am working on a demo version for a new software. I could have it running this weekend.
Magnus
Larry Sanger wrote:
Toby Bartels wrote:
Larry has already suggested that Nupedia might act like this; well, we could have a site that covers Team Nupedia and a bunch of other certification teams too, if there's interest.
OK, two comments: (1) while I and others have often said in the past that Nupedia is perfectly free to use Wikipedia articles, and even that Nupedia could serve as a Wikipedia-vetting project, that is *not* my most recent proposal.
I didn't mean to imply <This is like Larry's current proposal.>, I just meant <This is similar to an idea that you've seen before; if you don't recognise it, Larry mentioned it some time back.>. Sorry for the inadvertent slander ^_^.
(2) No offense but I really don't want any "team" of reviewers that I help organize associated with other (nonprofessional) reviewing "teams" as designated by Wikipedia.
Meaning that Nupedia wouldn't actually participate in the team site. Well, that's probably to be expected ^_^.
-- Toby
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org