The same article was just forwarded to me by a US-based academic who's been
very sceptical of Wikipedia. Felt a tinge of pride.
Sent her back the Open Medicine peer-reviewed Wikipedia article on dengue
fever, posted to this list earlier.
Congratulations,
Bishakha
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Keegan Peterzell <keegan.wiki(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:07 AM, svetlana
<svetlana(a)fastmail.com.au>
wrote:
MZMcBride wrote:
>
http://nyti.ms/1rHy4fK
>
> Wikipedia Is Emerging as Trusted Internet Source for Information on
Ebola
Noam
Cohen
October 26, 2014
The New York Times
Neat! (And a bit terrifying.)
MZMcBride
Should be fun to remember -- in addition to the poorly honored WP:NOTNEWS
-- other language sisters, and do some proper statistics, as EN.WP ≠
WP...
I get your point, Svetlana, but WP:NOTNEWS is honored in the article:
"
Others wonder why it includes so little discussion about the current
outbreak. It is covered in a separate article.
"
The Times piece highlights the article about the disease itself.
As for
EN.WP ≠ WP
, the article is aimed at English-language audience, so it's natural that
it's just "Wikipedia." I rarely see a press headline that denotes the
language edition of Wikipedia if the article deals with the Wikipedia in
the language of the piece.
All-in-all, good work by [English Wikipedia] Wikiproject Medicine as usual
:)
--
~Keegan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
This is my personal email address. Everything sent from this email address
is in a personal capacity.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>