[WikiEN-l] The boundaries of OR (contd)

[Stan Shebs]

Marc Riddell wrote:
> I did not mean to suggest that only 'experts' should be able to edit in WP.
> My suggestion is that those who are able to edit provide some clue as to
> their background and areas of interest that could lead a reasonable (yes. I
> used the word) person to accept what they have edited as credible.
>
>   
OK then, this suggestion is only meaningful if you're talking about a 
"may edit" bit, presumably set by admins upon receipt of - what? Does a 
college sophomore have to send in physical proof of their major? Are 
college freshmen never allowed to edit anything except Pokemon? :-) I 
have no formal credentials in naval history, but my personal library is 
larger and deeper than that of the local university, so I likely have 
more and better citeable sources than a random nonspecialist history 
professor at that university. On the other hand, maybe I have all these 
books, but don't understand them, or as more commonly happens (to other 
people :-) ), I've developed bizarre theories. What about professors who 
develop bizarre theories that they can't get published, so they try to 
push them into WP? Are they credible editors? Their background will 
likely look pretty good.

In practice, what's more important to know is whether editors have 
enough sense to know whether they are relying on sources they have, or 
are adding material with no solid basis in fact. It's a behavioral thing 
that no credential or bio bit helps me with, only past experience on WP.

Stan