[Foundation-l] Has Wikipedia changed since 2005?

geni geniice at gmail.com
Sun Oct 3 16:12:58 UTC 2010

On 3 October 2010 16:14, Peter Damian <peter.damian at btinternet.com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <WJhonson at aol.com>
> To: <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2010 3:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Has Wikipedia changed since 2005?
>> It was never intended however to be a collaboration amongst experts, but
>> rather an encyclopedia built *by* the masses, for the masses.  That was
>> the
>> intent.  In this, it has succeeded, for better or worse.
> But in certain areas it has not succeeded at all - philosophy in particular,
> and to a certain extent the humanities.  The question is why is that so.  A
> very plausible explanation is the one that Sarah has so cogently explained.

However it fundamentally fails to explain why other areas of the
humanities such as those covered by


seem to do okey.

> 1.  Is there a quality problem in certain areas.  Yes or no?
> 2.  If there is a problem, are there any underlying or systematic reasons?
> 3. If there are any underlying or systematic reasons, can they easily be
> addressed?

And if you think any of the above have answers you will discover the
problem that wikipedia has with the likes of philosophy.


More information about the foundation-l mailing list