[WikiEN-l] Rorschach wars continue

[FastLizard4]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

The concern is legitimate, if for no other reason than Wikipedia is
usually in the top ranks of any Google search.  But, Wikipedia is one
site out of God-knows-how-many on the Internet, and /someone/ has to
take the top search ranking on Google.  If it just so happens that that
top ranked page has the same information as the Wikipedia article, it's
the same problem, the only difference being that the problem is not
Wikipedia's.

Of course, all of these problems (any many, many more) could be solved
by destroying the Internet, but that wouldn't work too well, would it?
- --
- --FastLizard4 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FastLizard4 |
http://scalar.cluenet.org/~fastlizard4/)

Steve Bennett wrote:
> So, can someone fill me in on why we're laughing at this? From the article:
> 
> ----
> To psychologists, to render the Rorschach test meaningless would be a
> particularly painful development because there has been so much
> research conducted — tens of thousands of papers, by Dr. Smith’s
> estimate — to try to link a patient’s responses to certain
> psychological conditions. Yes, new inkblots could be used, these
> advocates concede, but those blots would not have had the research —
> “the normative data,” in the language of researchers — that allows the
> answers to be put into a larger context.
> ----
> 
> That seems like a pretty reasonable concern to me. To destroy the
> effectiveness of a test that has that kind of research background to
> it (tens of thousands of papers!!) doesn't seem like a laughing
> matter. Maybe it's unavoidable. Maybe it's collateral damage. But the
> concern that publishing it on Wikipedia is different from publishing
> it elsewhere on the web seems legitimate.
> 
> Steve
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkpypRUACgkQIUvvVwjDo7Y3IQCg1MTa74Q/fRsAazSjBdZ76ef/
B+cAnR6YYu2KCjZUnY7+EuIz5OGMakZI
=ZoOK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----