[WikiEN-l] Low citation quality in BLP articles

[WJhonson at aol.com]

<<In a message dated 1/6/2009 7:26:34 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
cbeckhorn at fastmail.fm writes:

That's  exactly my point. There is no lack of academic analysis of 
politicians, of  artists, etc. But we do not seem to use any of it.

For example, I can  find numerous articles on George W. Bush on JStor. 
And once he is out of  office there will be no lack of biogaphies written 
to analyze his  presidency. >>
 
First to attack your second point, why does W have to be out of office to  
have a biography ?  There are several books about Bush out, which analyze  his 
presidency.
 
Secondly, are you actually willing to admit that you are complaining about  
something you're not willing to fix yourself?
YOU my friend, if you can cite all these articles from Jstor, then do  so!
 
I personally have no access to Jstor, and I assume that the vast majority  of 
our editors probably don't either.
But regardless of that, I'm sure people cite what they can access and think  
is relevant.
 
I do not (in any way) feel that "academics" have any toe-hold on  
"biography".  In fact, professional writers, tend not to be in academia at  all, and they 
write prose that is much more interesting (apparently from their  book sales) 
then academics.
 
We are not an academic encyclopedia anymore than we are a science one, a  
religion one or a fancruft one.  In trying to represent the world as it is,  we 
must use what resources are present.  In general, for biographies,  newspapers 
and hard-cover biographies, are much more *present* and readable than  
anything in a humanities journal.  We're not trying to be technical as we  can be, 
we're also trying to attract more readership.
 
So again it's a balance.  But by *ALL* means, if you have  peer-reviewed 
biographical material, add it.  However "peer review" is not  necessarily the 
standard for all articles.  TV Guide is not "peer reviewed"  and yet we assume 
it's a reliable source for what's on TV
 
Will Johnson
 
 
 
 
 
**************New year...new news.  Be the first to know what is making 
headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)