"Edward Peschko" <esp5(a)pge.com> wrote in message
news:20040827044829.GA6979@mdssdev05...
well, I'm not sure if wikiprojects would work for
what I had in mind.
I want to get some heavy-hitters in on this, and I've talked to a
few of them (Freeman Dyson, Lynn Margulis, Jared Diamond) as well as
some of the more popular writers like Richard Heinberg and
Colin Campbell, some EIA energy analysts, the IEA, etc.)
to ask them for advice. One of the things I asked them about is
their opinion on wiki.
And they aren't too keen on it as it stands. Aggregating what I've heard,
in
particular, they have 5 major issues with it:
1 - no ready road to publishing. Its very hard to get a cohesive
physical paper out of wiki.
2 - no editorial control. Since anyone can edit the page,
the background is constantly shifting and not able to be given
as a reference. Plus they think it is 'impermanent'.
3 - No guarantee of attribution.
4 - lack of features for research collaboration.
5 - work in progress unable to be kept private amongst a group of
researchers until publication.
Firstly, with regards to objections to using Wikipedia for your project, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Replies
#1 - Just copy and paste the text of a page you think is good enough
#2 - You can link to / reference old versions of a page, which are
guaranteed to not change.
What do you mean by #4?
- gracefool