[WikiEN-l] What to do about our writing quality?

[WJhonson at aol.com]

In a message dated 5/24/2008 6:10:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
saintonge at telus.net writes:


> So then whose responsibility is it to check whether what the writer says 
> is consistent with the source?  I'm not even suggesting that the writer 
> acted improperly, just that he misread his source.  The writer can't 
> check himself, because he's likely to make the same mistake.  You have 
> absolved the copyeditor from any responsibility in this.  Who's left?>>>
> 

--------
That would be a good argument if we only had two members of Wikipedia.  Most 
of the articles on which I've worked, have dozens if not hundreds of members 
making changes.

If someone wants to *verify* the sources match the presented quotes or 
paraphrases that would be one task, but I would not refer to a verification agent as 
a "copy editor" personally.  To me copyediting involves the re-writing of the 
material to make it more readable.  Not to verify evidence that it accurately 
reflects the underlying sources.

So it appears this *dichotomy* is a *trichotomy* after all, if you will.  But 
remembering that our "writers" are not creative writers in the sense of 
making up a story, but rather every writer is supposed to be reflecting their 
sources.  Some write poorly in the first place, and need assistance in framing the 
language better.  Not necessarily in verifying the source material.

Others may need help in verifying the source material, but I've never been 
referring to that particular aspect of things.

Will Johnson


**************
Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch 
"Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.
      
(http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4&?NCID=aolfod00030000000002)