[Foundation-l] Britannica became free

[David Gerard]

2008/12/22 Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 5:38 PM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

>> (A tangential note: I consider NPOV to be our most important
>> innovation - much more radical than merely letting anyone edit your
>> encyclopedia. The concept of "neutrality" has existed in various
>> guises, but not like Wikipedia does it, with the consequences it has
>> as a source of information for the world.)

> Full agreement.
> My view on WP innovations:
> (1) NPOV information resource.


I'm thinking of things like areas that never got NPOV coverage *ever*.
Scientology is a good example - pro-Scientology sources are saccharine
and tend to leave out bits of great concern to the critics, and the
critical sources have lots of well-sourced information but are so
*bitter* they're all but unreadable. en:wp has some of the very best
information available on the topic.


> (2) Website with a permanent historical record (we're not the first,
> but the first popular).


What others are there?


> (3) Large scale free-content useful reference.


I'd put that below "anyone can edit" - (3) wasn't true until the last
two or three years. In 2004, when I started, en:wp was a
somewhat-useful source on computing topics, but very much one big stub
on most things. Now it's actually useful in all sorts of places.

(During the recent IWF/[[:en:Virgin Killer]] furore, our crappy work
proxy blocked *all* Wikipedia reading because of the block on the
page. And we felt the effects, because Wikipedia is such a good first
reference work on computing topics.)


> (4) Website anyone can edit.
> There are all sorts of interdependencies between these and other
> differentiators— It's easy to argue that without (4) the rest wouldn't
> be possible… but in terms of the lasting impact on society and our own
> uniqueness I think those are ordered about right.


- d.