[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia as a primary source

[stevertigo]

On 3/14/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> We're not saying "we should institute a method for any random person
> to make unqualified, unassailable, assertions". We're talking about
> letting *the subject* point factual errors out to us. If we're
> automatically assuming that subjects are untrustworthy, I look forward
> to banning the use of autobiographies and corporate histories as
> sources.

I can see what Eloquence was getting at now, in the sense that there
needs to be something
inbetween the Office and the Mob - using an open version of the OTRS model.

I think the OTRS part is a great idea, but making the leap from "edit
this wiki" to "primary source" is an enormous and presumptive
interpretation -- perhaps overstated, but nevertheless something best
left to people to judge after a new system is set up.

I suggested something like a ticket-based model just as a way to
organize workflow.
I never would have come up with the idea that subjects would want to
register themselves.
This "registrationalism" might infringe on NPOV. We aren't qualified
to take people's affidavits after all, nor to investigate particular
claims.  And because its tacky to edit your own articles after all,
ultimately they would want to make their changes anonymously, which
sort of contradicts your idea, doesnt it. Foundation bureaucracy 2.0?

Maybe Im not reading it right.
-Stevertigo