Seth Ilys <seth.ilys@...> writes:
I wasn't sufficiently clear, I think. I'm defining success *as* popularity, because I believe that the popularity of the site comes from the fact that we are a generally reliable reference source.
Then danni.com is a more successful encyclopedia.
Independent studies have found that the quality of writing and the accuracy of our articles are comparable to, if not better than, most published encyclopedias.
Studies independent of common sense.
I simply don't see the rampant errors and POV that you describe; I believe that you're imagining a problem where none exists.
Rather, I'm tiring of the persistence and pervasiveness of the problem.
However, if you have evidence that POV and vandalism are running rampant and unchecked on the 'pedia, I'd love to see it. I rather think you're being alarmist, Blair.
Go read some articles. If you don't see the POV and fallacy, question the depth of your own knowledge.
But I'm also a perpetual and incurable (and sometimes irrational) optimist as well. :)
The lifeblood of a substandard graffitopedia.
--Blair