[WikiEN-l] No references in the "end product?"

[Ian Woollard]

On 04/10/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> Sorry for top posting, but I just wanted to say that I agree with Daniel
> completely here.  Sources are critical.

Agreed, But should we be sourcing the *wikipedia*, or should we be
sourcing the *article*?

Because that's not the same thing.

In my view, sourcing each article like it is a standalone entity is a
throwback to the dead-tree encyclopedia where cross-referencing is
very painful indeed. With hypertexting it is quite possible to
construct an article that doesn't suffer for lack of references at all
(or very few)- because each paragraph summarises the position of other
article(s) and links to them. The linked-to articles contain numerous
references supporting the summary and their own article.

And this style of article is very useful for people to learn a new
area- the summary article is generally a lot easier to read than one
with the detailed, referenced articles. But right now, a readable
summary article cannot reach FA, because it doesn't have enough
references!!!

Whilst you *can* duplicate information around the wikipedia; that
makes the wikipedia more brittle- for example when something changes,
you would find it hard to track down all the changes that need to be
made.

So the basic unit of a hypertext encyclopedia is not the article, it's
the encyclopedia. In a hypertext entity like the wikipedia, I think we
need to source the *wikipedia*, not the article.

> --Jimbo

-- 
-Ian Woollard

"Victory can be perceived but not created."
For your own security, the Department of Homeland Security is watching you.