On 2/12/06, John Lee johnleemk@gawab.com wrote:
That was seriously one of the best articles I've ever seen written about us. I've shot an email to the author thanking him for doing his research instead of shabbily ommitting and making up stuff to support a particular viewpoint as most other journalists do. I don't think it's negative at all; I find it highlights some of the best and worst parts of Wikipedia and would probably comply with [[WP:NPOV]], if not [[WP:NOR]].
I agree it is one of the better newspaper stories about Wikipedia. The fact that it's the subject of a "two-part series" is a nod to Wikipedia's prominence.
However, the concept of NPOV was not explained significantly, which would have given the casual reader a better understanding of how the community works. The only mention was in a list of other Wikipedia values:
"However many there are, the Wikipedians have developed a complex and more-or-less democratic system of rules and policies for contributions, such as neutral point of view, civility, citation of sources, and no libel or vandalism."
Even the phrase "more-or-less democratic" makes me wince. The word "consensus" is not used at all in the two articles.
-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)