[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia's destiny

[Steve Block]

David Gerard wrote:
>> "If you have an idea that you think should become part of the corpus of
>> knowledge that is Wikipedia, the best approach is to arrange to have
>> your results published in a peer-reviewed journal or reputable news
>> outlet, and then document your work in an appropriately non-partisan
>> manner."
> 
> 
>     http://www.english.ufl.edu/imagetext/
> 
> See what I mean about the dangers of reasoning from personal
> ignorance? Now I eagerly await objections that don't boil down to "but
> webcomics are worse for Wikipedia than Pokemon."
> 
> (Part of the webcomics debacle was an attempt to get Snowspinner
> excluded from webcomics deletion discussions because as an expert he
> was obviously biased on the subject. Not in any particular direction,
> but *by being an expert*.)

ImageText isn't a webcomics specific journal, and isn't the only comics 
journal out there, there's a lot of comics theory published in the 
Journal of Popular Culture and more importantly The International 
Journal of Comic Art, as well as The Comics Journal, which covers web 
comics.  I fail to see what your point is David, and how it relates to 
the comments it purports to respond to.  It seems to support them 
entirley, by arguing that such sources do exist which allow articles to 
be written.


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.1.0/269 - Release Date: 24/02/06