[Wikimedia-l] evaluation of electronics articles

Anders Wennersten mail at anderswennersten.se
Tue May 28 20:06:30 UTC 2013

I usually say Wikipedia consist of some hundred different encyclopedias 
on different topics.

And some of these are excellent and have full covering, like popes, 
birds, where wp  is better then all other encyclopedia in all aspects

Other subject area are more uneven both in covering and in content for 
each article, as this review give an example of for electronic

I am also convinced that one of the most important focuses on our 
editorial work is in getting a complete covering in as many subjects as 
possible. This is one of the reasons I do believe we need to develop 
(semi) automatic generation of articles from official databases (like 
the project to have articles on All lakes in x-country I have written 
of). Also that Wikidata have a key role in this new focus, enabling us 
to have a common repository for these common basic data


Fred Bauder skrev 2013-05-28 21:18:
> I think that is a pretty good analysis of the entire project. It is
> directly related to lack of editorial control and the impossibility of
> being able to assign writers to problem areas.
> Fred
>> I ran across this paragraph in the preface to O'Reilly's new book
>> "Encyclopedia of Electronic Components." [1] I'm not sure that I've ever
>> seen an evaluation of Wikipedia's electronics coverage before, but to me
>> this sounds like a pretty good description of a lot of our engineering
>> articles (at least in English)...
>> "Wikipedia’s coverage of electronics is impressive but inconsistent.
>> Some
>> entries are elementary, while others are extremely technical. Some are
>> shallow, while others are deep. Some are well organized, while others run
>> off into obscure topics that may have interested one of the contributors
>> but are of little practical value to most readers. Many topics are
>> distributed over multiple entries, forcing you to hunt through several
>> URLs. Overall, Wikipedia tends to be good if you want theory, but
>> not-so-good if you want hands-on practicality."
>> -- phoebe
>> 1. http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920026105.do
>> --
>> * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers
>> <at>
>> gmail.com *
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

More information about the Wikimedia-l mailing list