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

[Kpjas]

On 10/5/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- 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?

I personally don't think we could have problems with WikiProjects as
POV pushers. They are managing hundreds/thousands of articles already
and we don't see any POV problems
(do you agree?) Something to be wary of is scientific/expertly/group
bias that can creep in at some point.

WikiProjects could in a longer perspective become valuable in many
respects, especially content quality and verification. Perhaps a kind
of interWikiProject Workgroups might be needed for interdisciplinary.

Some WikiProjects like Biography are bustling with activity, I'm not
sure about others and some WikiProjects have turned inactive. I hope
WikiProject Council will become a means for organising and promoting
new WikiProjects as well as expanding/invigorating existing ones.

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_WikiProjects
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council

Regards,
Kpjas.

-- 
Wikipedia - World's Greatest http://www.wikipedia.org