--- Robert Graham Merkel <rgmerk(a)mira.net> wrote:
In any case, when discussing the 1911 EB when it first
became
available
on the net, it quickly became clear that the material from it is
totally unsuited for cut-and-paste into Wikipedia anyway. Obviously
much of it is totally out-of-date (read the article on "Calculating
machines" for amusing speculation on the possibility of a completed
Analytical Engine), the style is archaic, and even the stuff on
historical figures has been invalidated by later research.
Use it for source material (with a good deal of care), but I would
strongly argue *not* to cut-and-paste it in.
I very much agree with this. I have seen several dozen-paragraph
articles that were imported from EB and then nobody dared to touch them
anymore (except for wikification). The text is well-written in an
authorative style, and people shy away from modifying it, and don't
feel the need to check the facts. Even though much of it is outdated or
even wrong. I believe the natural evolution of a Wikipedia article is
actually held up by a large scale EB cut-and-past job.
Axel
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com