[WikiEN-l] WP and Deep Web, was Re: Age fabrication and original research

[Charles Matthews]

Carcharoth wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:37 AM, stevertigo <stvrtg at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>   
>> Well the WP:SOHE idea to me seems a reasonable compromise -- one that
>> makes small parts of copyright texts open to our research needs, while
>> still respecting the needs of authors to keep whole works marketable.
>>     
>
> WP:SOHE being the page that you wrote recently:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sourcehelpers
>
> "A nearly identical concept at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange
> (consisting of shared resources and resource requests) while
> expansive, is fairly inactive."
>
> Did you not think of trying to make Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource
> Exchange more active, rather than starting a new page and a new
> proposal?
>   
I don't care that much where WP:DREDGE ends up redirecting. I rhink we 
may still be at an early stage of conceptualising the useful "dredging" 
that needs to go on.

For free texts, this currently looks like an internal Wikisource debate, 
which is why I was a bit guarded in discussing it. For "fair use" texts 
thre is sn obvious issue whcich is that fair use is determined to an 
extent by issues of context (or in other words it isn't a matter of 
delegating collection to a Wikiquote or clone). For database querying, 
unless the database is free/open, there are obvious issues about how 
useful it would be for verification. You'd have thought it would anyway 
be part of fact-checking in some cases, but the "age fabrication" thread 
would not have arisen if it was really straightforward as an issue.

I wonder what a survey across WikiProjects would reveal, about the most 
standard or routine ways people do research in areas they know well.. 
I'm certainly interested in the general issues of "lists of redlinks" 
and how they get matched to combiuations of resources for articles.

Charles