[WikiEN-l] About the reliability of the Wikipedia process andcontent

[Charles Matthews]

Mav wrote

> Scale issues are very important so we must develop ways to to quickly
review
> content.

I say 'thanks but no thanks' to review boards.  They have impressive
support, so I should present an argument.

At present I write about 50% in an area where I have 11 years post-doctoral
experience, and 50% in another where I last took an exam at age 13.  In the
first I should expect to be 'reviewing' others' contributions; in the second
I'm not confident in anything I can't fact-check in several sources.

So, where I can put my finger on my unease, is that I can see a case where,
if pressed to review an article some months ago, I would have said
'sub-standard'.  Clearly a term paper, wierd notation, author not quite on
top of it.  The problem is, it took me half a year of having it on my
conscience to realise that I did know enough to rescue it, and get the point
straight.  And I think the wiki process shows up well, there; it has done
little harm, and, with all due modesty, if I wasn't already familiar with
the point, it pushes the envelope on the WP coverage.

Charles