[WikiEN-l] A future for Nupedia?

[Daniel Mayer]

--- Matt R <matt_crypto at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> I disagree with you. Personally, I would distinguish between the process for
> writing articles, and the process of evaluating the quality of articles. For
> the former, when *writing* articles, academic qualifications should confer
> no additional authority or weight -- an unqualified person should have an
> equal right to edit the content of an article as should a PhD.
> 
> However, when certifying the quality of articles, I think expert review (in
> addition to general review) is necessary -- I can give reasons for this, if
> you want. Academic qualifications are one form of evidence of expertise.
> ...
> P.S. I like the idea of "stable" vs "development" versions of an article.

<aol>I very much agree with this.</aol>

The stable version could be at http://en.wikipedia.org/stable/Article_Name and
the development version would still be at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Name with appropriate backlinks and a
different-enough UI to make the distinction obvious. 

But we have to start something ala Larry's sifter idea since we are getting
slammed in the media due to our perceived non-trusted status (I personally
think these objections are laughable since they are comparing us to
encyclopedias that are hundreds of years old and that have very similar
disclaimers). 

-- mav

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com