[WikiEN-l] "Wikipedia committee member"

[Carcharoth]

Access to information in an efficient manner *includes* providing
readers with choice. Writing an encyclopedia also includes
consideration of the readers. There is a balance to be struck between
editorial discretion and what a reader might want. If you go too far
to rigid editorial control, you lose readers. If you go to far to
pandering to readers, you lose credibility. It is not one or the
other, but a balance between the two (and no, please don't point to
Wikipedia's popularity as meaning we've got it right so far -
Wikipedia's popularity arose for a mixture of reasons, and in fact the
massive popularity serves to obscure some things that readers find
wrong with Wikipedia).

Carcharoth

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Brock Weller <brock.weller at gmail.com> wrote:
> I can't believe this idea is being seriously presented. We are an
> Encyclopedia. That is one of the Five Pillars ([[WP:5P]]). The job of a
> comprehensive encyclopedia is to facilitate access to information in an
> efficient manner. Putting extra barriers in front of that means you aren't
> looking at it as a comprehensive encyclopedia, which we are, but as TV Guide
> (or Playbill, in this case) which we are decidedly not. You want a teaser?
> You want a hook? Go read a preview. You want to read an encyclopedic article
> about the subject/play/episode/whatever? Congratulations, you've come to the
> right place.
>
> We aren't here to protect you from the big bad world, we're here to present
> information. If that information is made harder to get, then someone clearly
> made a mistake.
>
> -Brock
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Carcharoth <carcharothwp at googlemail.com>wrote:
>
>> That is very helpful. I wonder if there is room to suggest this in
>> some guideline somewhere on how editors should set up the titles of
>> sections in articles to aid not just readers reading through the
>> article from beginning to end, but to aid readers looking at the
>> contents and selecting (or omitting) bits they don't want to read. You
>> could even (though this is a bit silly) provide the option for people
>> to "hide" sections and then read the whole page and not have to beware
>> of scrolling down too far. It wouldn't be a default option, I don't
>> think, but people could have some optional overlay that would give
>> them the option to select (or omit) bits of the article to create a
>> customised article for them to read.
>>
>> Carcharoth
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Shane Simmons <avicennasis at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> Actually, I'd like to read the article about the play without finding
>> >> out the ending. Is that an unreasonable thing to ask?
>> >
>> > Reading the article as it appeared on 26 July 2010, [1] there is an
>> > entire section called "Identity of the murderer"... If I did not want
>> > to learn the identity of the murderer, I would have skipped over this
>> > section.* That's what I did for years before I became an editor. If I
>> > suspected a section would contain spoilers, I skipped it. When looking
>> > up books I plan to read, I still do this.
>> >
>> > That's one of the reasons for sections - they can allow readers to
>> > quickly find just the info they are looking for. I can look up Harry
>> > Potter and the Deathly Hallows [2], and if I didn't want a spoiler but
>> > wanted to read about pricing problems, there is a section in the Table
>> > of Contents, right at the top, called "Price wars and other
>> > controversies". This allows me to bypass the  "Synopsis" section,
>> > including the subsections "Plot introduction" and "Plot summary".
>> >
>> > Perhaps this is not the way everyone reads, but I think context clues
>> > can give their own warning to the reader.
>> >
>> > I'm also not sure if there are any articles out there that have
>> > spoilers under a section you might not expect them to be. For example,
>> > I wouldn't expect to find a spoiler under the "Release date" section.
>> > But I also can't think of a good reason why it would be there anyways,
>> > and it should probably be moved to the plot section(s).
>> >
>> > Just my two cents. :)
>> > -User:Avicennasis
>> >
>> > [1]
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Mousetrap&oldid=375574290#Identity_of_the_murderer
>> > [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter_and_the_Deathly_Hallows
>> >
>> > *A quick glance did not show this information to be listed in any
>> > other section, however I did not read the whole article word for word
>> > to double-check.
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>