[Foundation-l] Ensuring veracity of articles based on print sources

[Birgitte SB]

--- Valentina Faussone <valentina_faussone at yahoo.it>
wrote:

> > WikiProjects could prepare lists of reputable
> > printed sources in
> > different fields and eventually (dis)qualify a
> given
> > source.
>  
> Sound like "L'indice dei libri proibiti", the list
> of
> forbidden books that catholic church used for
> centuries. 
> It became famous for considering unreliable and
> wicked
> books from authors like Honoré de Balzac, Cartesio,
> Daniel Defoe, Denis Diderot, Victor Hugo, Immanuel
> Kant, Voltaire, Émile Zola (and many others), thus
> forbidding them. ... Yours seems to me a optimistic
> dream hard to make true.
> 
> > In my opinion we need more WikiProjects that are
> > vivacious and full of
> > "experts". All dubious Wikipedia content should be
> > directed towards
> > WikiProjects for verification.
> 
> Plus, will these guys from the wikiprojects be able
> to
> be both expert AND npov? Or will they give their
> opinion in all the matters in wich there isn't just
> *true* way to solve the problem?
> 
> Please note that mine are just questions, I'm not
> polemizing for the sake of it...
> 
> Tinette

I agree these are good questions for an ambititous
project.  I do not think there are easy answers.  I
really think it is premature to rely so heavily on
Wikiprojects ability as experts as well as being
neutral.  They are not matured enough yet, but maybe
some day we will be able to do this.  Perhaps a good
question for right now is how could we identify a
Wikiproject which has matured to such a level?  How
can we encourage Wikiprojects to develop into
something we can put so much trust in?


Birgitte SB

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com