[WikiEN-l] Larry's text

[Rotem Dan]

--- tarquin <tarquin at planetunreal.com> wrote:

> So, reiterating what I've said twice: it's not
> "larry's OWN text". It's 
> been called "Larry's text" as an abbreviation.

Hmm.. I think I overreacted to the use of the "'s",
like Larry "owns" this text, still, I think
wikipedia's
ethics should not allow contributors to write under
their own name, this is a part of the GFDL. If Larry
or anyone wants to be recognized, they can publish
this on their personal website.

> Please don't let's turn 
> this into a huge issue where there is none.
> oh, wait, it already has been.
It is not a "huge" issue, just something i'm trying to
point out. 

Maybe it's not about Larry (nothing here is personal
anyway). Maybe it's about the introduction of highly
pre-mature (and somewhat biased and misorienting)
*SCIENTIFIC* texts/text-books/papers into the 'pedia,
why should this be done? If the contributor already
knows his/her addition is of a specialized field, in
which chances are low that fellow peers literate in
the field will review and modify, I think they
shouldn't have added that in the first place.

I'd rather 20 lines of accurate information, than 500
lines of
"unreviewed-unsupported-somewhat-scientific-text-of-
undergraduate-lectures"

Wikipedia seems to work for encyclopedic articles, not
for scientific papers or text-books. As for the
Knowledge article, I think a book reference would have
been suffice.

> 
>  > you should grant *everyone* to put their own text
> 
> well, we already do.... note the "Edit text of this
> page" link ;-)

Unfortunately, I am not a philosopher (or pretending
to be) and that is not the point.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
http://platinum.yahoo.com