[WikiEN-l] a valid criticism

[Jack Lynch]

3 quick answers:

#1. you can do what you just did, and we can all get editing.

#2. You can sanction some reasonable form of article rating system, so
that people know if the article they are reading is crap.

#3. Find a way to <u>reward</u> good users, and to encourage bad users
to become good, that doesn't involve adminship. Punishments like the
ArbCom deals out are just fine, but all successful organisations put
the emphasis on rewards.

I'm off to edit Bill Gates, and the Jane Fonda XD

Cheers,
Jack (Sam Spade)

On 10/6/05, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2005/10/the_amorality_o.php
>
> I don't agree with much of this critique, and I certainly do not share
> the attitude that Wikipedia is better than Britannica merely because it
> is free.  It is my intention that we aim at Britannica-or-better
> quality, period, free or non-free.  We should strive to be the best.
>
> But the two examples he puts forward are, quite frankly, a horrific
> embarassment.  [[Bill Gates]] and [[Jane Fonda]] are nearly unreadable crap.
>
> Why?  What can we do about it?
>
> --Jimbo
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>