If we want to do fact checking, which we do whether Congress has
decided publishers are responsible for the content of their
publications or not, the way to automate it is shown at
Best regards,
Jim
On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Amir E. Aharoni
<amir.aharoni(a)mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:
I'd just stick to "The Free
Encyclopedia". It's a thing we can really agree
upon. (We can, right? Please tell me we can.)
But I am curious - who made this ad?
בתאריך יום א׳, 15 באפר׳ 2018, 15:54, מאת Anthony Cole <ahcoleecu(a)gmail.com
:
I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result
was a Google ad linking to
wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We used
to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest
than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and
oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion
about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else
uncomfortabe with this?
--
Anthony Cole
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>