[WikiEN-l] Times article (London)

[Andrey]

The system of stable versions is long overdue, if we are willing to face the
mounting wave of criticism of Wikipedia as a free-for-all project aiming at
prolific mediocrity rather than excellence.

--Ghirla

On 8/18/07, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> on 8/17/07 4:52 AM, Andrey at yaroslavl at gmail.com wrote:
>
> This is an issue that has been touched upon several times, and in several
> different ways, in the past. But each time the discussion has spiraled off
> into battles about what constitutes a "professional" and the definition of
> "expert".
>
> Well over six months ago I personally persuaded several top-notch writers
> in
> their field to contribute to Wikipedia articles. In each and every case
> they
> finally gave up in frustration after their work was reverted or challenged
> on grounds that were pure bullshit. These are persons who write for
> professional journals all of the time, and frequently engage in arguments
> over their writings with others that they know. The reality of the matter
> is
> they, and persons like them, have neither the time nor inclination to
> argue
> their work with persons they have no clue about.
>
> I really don't know what the answer is. But I do know that part of the
> problem is the fact that the Project is still very much in need of a firm,
> coherent direction, and an equally strong identity.
>
> Marc Riddell