[WikiEN-l] About the reliability of the Wikipedia process and content

[Christopher Mahan]

--- Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:
 
> A common criticism about Wikipedia is that there is no easy way to
> find out if
> the article you are reading can be trusted at all. 

I agree with Mav.
 
> Versioning will help that. 

Am not so sure. 

Imagine I am Anonip the Egyptian, and I go to the article "Jerusalem"
and get dropped into Revision 20040807:45. I read it, it's a lovely
article, and I get all warm and fuzzy inside. 

Then I decide to add something to it... Alas, we are now on version
20041116:398, the bastardized spawn of Hades, mangled to death by
edit warriors, pov pushers, and a veritable army of sock puppets
(would that be a drawerful?). I recoil in horror and decide to not
edit, since, well, it's frankly quite depressing.

So the average man, in constant fear of the marauding trolls and
hordes of vandals, steers clear of the bleeding sword-edge version
and stays within the clearly marked path of the Official and Right
Version of Safety. 

Yet, down this path the common man no longer contributes to the W.
Only the hardcore groups of ultra-perfectionists and extremists will
remain to edit, polarize, and ultimately destroy the W.

Do I have a solution? No.
But I would caution against versioning.

=====
Chris Mahan
818.943.1850 cell
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
chris.mahan at gmail.com
http://www.christophermahan.com/


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! 
http://my.yahoo.com